lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Mar]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 14/37] mtd: nand: denali: support "nand-ecc-strength" DT property
Hi Boris,


2017-03-30 23:02 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:46:00 +0900
> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>
>> Historically, this driver tried to choose as big ECC strength as
>> possible, but it would be reasonable to allow DT to set a particular
>> ECC strength with "nand-ecc-strength" property. This is useful
>> when a particular ECC setting is hard-coded by firmware (or hard-
>> wired by boot ROM).
>>
>> If no ECC strength is specified in DT, "nand-ecc-maximize" is implied
>> since this was the original behavior.
>
> You said there is currently no DT users,

Right. No DT users ever in upstream.


> so how about changing the
> "fallback to ECC maximization" behavior for DT users, and instead of
> maximizing the ECC strength take the NAND requirements into account
> (chip->ecc_strength_ds).

This is difficult to judge in some cases.

As I said before, 4/512 and 8/1024 are not equivalent.

If chip's requirement chip->ecc_step_ds matches
to the ecc->size supported by the controller,
this is easy.


If a chip requests 1024B, then the controller can only support 512B chunk
(or vice versa), it is difficult to simply compare
ecc strength.

Is it a bad thing if we use too strong ECC strength?

The disadvantage I see is we will have less OOB-free bytes,
but this will not be fatal, I guess.




--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-03-31 07:07    [W:0.160 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site