From: Han Xu <han.xu@freescale.com>
To: "Bean Huo 霍斌斌 (beanhuo)" <beanhuo@micron.com>
Cc: "b45815@freescale.com" <b45815@freescale.com>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
"shijie.huang@arm.com" <shijie.huang@arm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"vinod.koul@intel.com" <vinod.koul@intel.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
"dmaengine@vger.kernel.org" <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/7] mtd: nand: gpmi: may use minimum required ecc
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:28:03 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151029182801.GA7007@chopperman.am.freescale.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A765B125120D1346A63912DDE6D8B6310BF4F392@NTXXIAMBX02.xacn.micron.com>
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 04:34:37AM +0000, Bean Huo 霍斌斌 (beanhuo) wrote:
> > > > By default NAND driver will choose the highest ecc strength that oob
> > > > could contain, in this case, for some 8K+744 NAND flash, the ecc
> > > > strength will be up to 52bit, which beyonds the i.MX6QDL BCH capability
> > (40bit).
> > >
> > >
> > > For normal working environment, if hardware BCH ECC cannot meet NAND
> > > ecc requirement, We can set a minimum required ecc strength, and file
> > system refresh/scrub can control bitflips under NAND ecc strength. But during
> > reflow solder, it is very possible that NAND bitflips may increase over your
> > hardware BCH capability, I don't know how this controller handle this?
> > > For example, NAND require 80bit ECC, but hardware BCH ECC can only hold
> > 40bit.
> > > After reflow, there are some blocks that bitflips over 40bit.
> >
> > if the minimum ecc strength read from NAND ONFI parameter exceeds the
> > BCH ECC capability, the NAND driver quits and reports unsupport NAND chip.
>
> Current Linux already set ECC strength according to NAND minimum required ECC that read
> from ONFI table. So if NAND minimum required ECC is 60bit, but this BCH controller can only hold 40bit,
> NAND driver quits? Why not transfer to use software BCH ECC?
SW ECC brings huge computational complexity, that's why needs HW ECC. I
think user should choose the proper NAND chip according to platfrom
capability rather than involve SW ECC in driver.
>
> > Do you mean reflow solder may change the NAND minimum required ECC
> > strength, in other word, the actual minimum ECC may larger than it said in
> > NAND chip SPEC?
>
> NAND minimum required ECC does not changed because of reflow.
> I mean that if hardware BCH ECC Can not meet nand minimum required ECC, during normal working, we can set
> ECC strength according to Your hardware ECC capability.
> for example in this case, NAND minimum required ECC is 60bit, but hardware ECC capability Is 40bit, during normal working,
> we can set ECC strength according to 40bit, this can work, it will definitely increase PE cycle.
> But for reflow operation, there are some blocks that their bitflips will increase over your hardware ECC 40bit, so how do you handle this?
> Or you don't meet this case?
I don't quite understand, why 60bit ECC NAND can work on 40bit ECC
platform, it is quite possible to get uncorrectable ECC error. Excuse
me, I didn't get your point about reflow operation part, in your case,
the original ECC read from ONFI table has already beyond the HW ECC,
even without reflow.
>
>
>
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Han "Allen" Xu
>
--
Best Regards,
Han "Allen" Xu
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-29 18:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-28 13:42 Bean Huo 霍斌斌 (beanhuo)
2015-10-28 15:57 ` Han Xu
2015-10-29 4:34 ` Bean Huo 霍斌斌 (beanhuo)
2015-10-29 18:28 ` Han Xu [this message]
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=20151029182801.GA7007@chopperman.am.freescale.net \
--to=han.xu@freescale.com \
--cc=b45815@freescale.com \
--cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=shijie.huang@arm.com \
--cc=vinod.koul@intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®