From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: Cristiano De Alti <cristiano_dealti@hotmail.com>
Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: i.MX21 ADS NAND flash bad blocks scan. Barebox vs Linux
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 07:31:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140317063107.GB17250@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <loom.20140313T212720-896@post.gmane.org>
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 08:44:08PM +0000, Cristiano De Alti wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm probably posting to the wrong list since this is Linux issue.
> I'm still trying to revive this old board.
>
> This board has a 64MBi Samsung NAND flash that is detected both by Barebox
> (recent snapshot) and Linux 3.4.77.
>
> The issue is that, while the bad blocks scan takes a negligible time on
> Barebox, it takes 10 minutes to complete on Linux.
> They both detect block 0 as a bad block. This is strange since it is
> guaranteed to be good by the manufacturer but I've read the OOB data with
> barebox and it's marked ad bad. I found this board in the lab and don't know
> how it was used before.
>
> Barebox code, nand_imx.c, and Linux code, mxc_nand.c, are similar but not
> identical of course. I also think that Linux code was contributed by
> Pengutronix so this is the reason I'm asking here.
>
> I've enabled debug statements in Linux code and added my own statements.
> As said, scan completes, everything looks OK but it is very slow.
I assume this is a 512 byte page Nand, right? In this case you shouldn't
have any issues with bad block marker swapping.
An issue could be that one party uses a bad block table wereas the other
scans each time. I recommend using a bad block table for barebox and the
kernel.
Maybe somebody has marked block 0 as bad to see whether the ROM Code
handles this properly.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-17 6:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-13 20:44 Cristiano De Alti
2014-03-17 6:31 ` Sascha Hauer [this message]
2014-03-17 22:09 ` Cristiano De Alti
2014-03-17 6:43 ` Alexander Aring
2014-03-17 22:25 ` Cristiano De Alti
2014-03-18 6:22 ` Alexander Aring
2014-03-22 16:08 ` Cristiano De Alti
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140317063107.GB17250@pengutronix.de \
--to=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=cristiano_dealti@hotmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox