Received: by 2002:ac0:a594:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m20-v6csp1644405imm; Wed, 16 May 2018 00:33:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZqz9S9s2NikstByn/KAYihYG2sxWR+Vy4H5B3gy0kVCaR4JFrPc/HLW6hdtLJZP2nf+42SL X-Received: by 2002:a63:603:: with SMTP id 3-v6mr14923291pgg.435.1526456037919; Wed, 16 May 2018 00:33:57 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1526456037; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=bsHKaaEBFzNmx/ftL4pbln9iraovHyYUrC8Kt2Eilp5JZUijF37lcN7uIzjLXv0SnI gCSTZ3PIgFKOHBlq5PJ7H7SGleU7DEQ7Eop9rK368tFGPrfHHQfnjVkRzj11m2c0wtk0 52n3C75NMmKVkPKiEn/kUuCvhQJcH0pn/2ax6mduyjQqPYQNzLAqCFifeIPHStaxpCdZ Yq85Gvh2ZPjBKjgd9/yihHfs2DOIfhnJQouZ2SLgeR13xQQkjG1yD7OOdNJyEwtost1/ FfqmC7EZc1ryMVp2QEy/X1KForpl11OO00f49SqM33/wNbO9LSh+29UHM2z/CUDWuqJD 2weg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-language :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject:arc-authentication-results; bh=EcKc5i+9EbWb3gvB3uJDJuiyWjdxE5egdYpwWMnDxRs=; b=NM/YFMbSrB/Q0kZoWt4MIfOoRMhgRvdfFpBNCzxCcdy+XL8o0e4wr17WsqqcHBAMEe S4wpl3Zmh7KBIAGiTtmB7adebK1Ft0xBA423ZYlfqgaMulo3ftGcmTkFK3lpi9gt8pLA wCPFaCmR7pkCvv27T9e/lbNqfRpVMIRGw+K6GeSfWYuWmJPlLnYYnMa4eu0NhcYOLA+X Q75k7dr7i3c+i66rKozH5CE4R0rrN96/Q7Kf27mvyc5AmUBgTYfWhoJKw9b/Luov1eLG TP0sOTv7HT0TkAMh7+JtOxSvy+UDIqqLgjPd93yXDb/EG4vtu5gDhKWF5YL8w1aGPURS ujJw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n6-v6si1933854pla.12.2018.05.16.00.33.43; Wed, 16 May 2018 00:33:57 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752525AbeEPHdK (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 16 May 2018 03:33:10 -0400 Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.4]:57862 "EHLO smtp4-g21.free.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751151AbeEPHdH (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2018 03:33:07 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.7] (unknown [78.218.214.33]) by smtp4-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B2019F594; Wed, 16 May 2018 09:33:02 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] mtd: rawnand: use bit-wise majority to recover the contents of ONFI parameter To: Boris Brezillon Cc: "Wan, Jane (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale)" , "miquel.raynal@bootlin.com" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "computersforpeace@gmail.com" , "richard@nod.at" , "marek.vasut@gmail.com" , "yamada.masahiro@socionext.com" , "prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com" , "shawnguo@kernel.org" , "jagdish.gediya@nxp.com" , "shreeya.patel23498@gmail.com" , "Bos, Ties (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale)" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20180515093429.34902670@bbrezillon> From: Chris Moore Message-ID: Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 09:32:57 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180515093429.34902670@bbrezillon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Le 15/05/2018 à 09:34, Boris Brezillon a écrit : > On Tue, 15 May 2018 06:45:51 +0200 > Chris Moore wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Le 13/05/2018 à 06:30, Wan, Jane (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale) a écrit : >>> Per ONFI specification (Rev. 4.0), if all parameter pages have invalid CRC values, the bit-wise majority may be used to recover the contents of the parameter pages from the parameter page copies present. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jane Wan >>> --- >>> v7: change debug print messages >>> v6: support the cases that srcbufs are not contiguous >>> v5: make the bit-wise majority functon generic >>> v4: move the bit-wise majority code in a separate function >>> v3: fix warning message detected by kbuild test robot >>> v2: rebase the changes on top of v4.17-rc1 >>> >>> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c >>> index 72f3a89..b43b784 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c >>> @@ -5087,6 +5087,35 @@ static int nand_flash_detect_ext_param_page(struct nand_chip *chip, >>> } >>> >>> /* >>> + * Recover data with bit-wise majority >>> + */ >>> +static void nand_bit_wise_majority(const void **srcbufs, >>> + unsigned int nsrcbufs, >>> + void *dstbuf, >>> + unsigned int bufsize) >>> +{ >>> + int i, j, k; >>> + >>> + for (i = 0; i < bufsize; i++) { >>> + u8 cnt, val; >>> + >>> + val = 0; >>> + for (j = 0; j < 8; j++) { >>> + cnt = 0; >>> + for (k = 0; k < nsrcbufs; k++) { >>> + const u8 *srcbuf = srcbufs[k]; >>> + >>> + if (srcbuf[i] & BIT(j)) >>> + cnt++; >>> + } >>> + if (cnt > nsrcbufs / 2) >>> + val |= BIT(j); >>> + } >>> + ((u8 *)dstbuf)[i] = val; >>> + } >>> +} >>> + >>> +/* >>> * Check if the NAND chip is ONFI compliant, returns 1 if it is, 0 otherwise. >>> */ >>> static int nand_flash_detect_onfi(struct nand_chip *chip) >>> @@ -5102,7 +5131,7 @@ static int nand_flash_detect_onfi(struct nand_chip *chip) >>> return 0; >>> >>> /* ONFI chip: allocate a buffer to hold its parameter page */ >>> - p = kzalloc(sizeof(*p), GFP_KERNEL); >>> + p = kzalloc((sizeof(*p) * 3), GFP_KERNEL); >>> if (!p) >>> return -ENOMEM; >>> >>> @@ -5113,21 +5142,32 @@ static int nand_flash_detect_onfi(struct nand_chip *chip) >>> } >>> >>> for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) { >>> - ret = nand_read_data_op(chip, p, sizeof(*p), true); >>> + ret = nand_read_data_op(chip, &p[i], sizeof(*p), true); >>> if (ret) { >>> ret = 0; >>> goto free_onfi_param_page; >>> } >>> >>> - if (onfi_crc16(ONFI_CRC_BASE, (uint8_t *)p, 254) == >>> + if (onfi_crc16(ONFI_CRC_BASE, (u8 *)&p[i], 254) == >>> le16_to_cpu(p->crc)) { >>> + if (i) >>> + memcpy(p, &p[i], sizeof(*p)); >>> break; >>> } >>> } >>> >>> if (i == 3) { >>> - pr_err("Could not find valid ONFI parameter page; aborting\n"); >>> - goto free_onfi_param_page; >>> + const void *srcbufs[3] = {p, p + 1, p + 2}; >>> + >>> + pr_warn("Could not find a valid ONFI parameter page, trying bit-wise majority to recover it\n"); >>> + nand_bit_wise_majority(srcbufs, ARRAY_SIZE(srcbufs), p, >>> + sizeof(*p)); >>> + >>> + if (onfi_crc16(ONFI_CRC_BASE, (u8 *)p, 254) != >>> + le16_to_cpu(p->crc)) { >>> + pr_err("ONFI parameter recovery failed, aborting\n"); >>> + goto free_onfi_param_page; >>> + } >>> } >>> >>> /* Check version */ >> This version is still hard coded for a three sample bitwise majority vote. >> So why not use the method which I suggested previously for v2 and which >> I repeat below? > Because I want the nand_bit_wise_majority() function to work with > nsrcbufs > 3 (the ONFI spec says there's at least 3 copy of the param > page, but NAND vendor can decide to put more). Also, if the X copies of > the PARAM are corrupted (which is rather unlikely), that means we > already spent quite a lot of time reading the different copies and > calculating the CRC, so I think we don't care about perf optimizations > when doing bit-wise majority. > >> The three sample bitwise majority can be implemented without bit level >> manipulation using the identity: >> majority3(a, b, c) = (a & b) | (a & c) | (b & c) >> This can be factorized slightly to (a & (b | c)) | (b & c) >> This enables the operation to be performed 8, 16, 32 or even 64 bits at >> a time depending on the hardware. >> >> This method is not only faster and but also more compact. >> I do understand that the ONFI specifications permit more than 3 copies. However elsewhere the proposed code shows no intention of handling other cases. The constant 3 is hard coded in the following lines extracted from the proposed code: ... +    p = kzalloc((sizeof(*p) * 3), GFP_KERNEL); ...      for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) { ...      if (i == 3) { ... +        const void *srcbufs[3] = {p, p + 1, p + 2}; Moreover the last of these is difficult to generalize. Cheers, Chris