From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WOCUz-0007So-8f for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:45:06 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WOCUU-0005Yc-Op for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 21:44:34 +0100 Received: from static-82-85-234-51.clienti.tiscali.it ([82.85.234.51]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 21:44:34 +0100 Received: from cristiano_dealti by static-82-85-234-51.clienti.tiscali.it with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 21:44:34 +0100 From: Cristiano De Alti Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:44:08 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: i.MX21 ADS NAND flash bad blocks scan. Barebox vs Linux To: barebox@lists.infradead.org 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. Maybe someone has an idea. Ciao _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox