Received: by 2002:ac0:a5b6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m51-v6csp3730904imm; Tue, 29 May 2018 12:31:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZp8x5jWRbJp2IjzB60dconBW7LAbPA4EGAMk1gEF5RCuhnrVfOkPcETa/9nVQFN4MA5MW2X X-Received: by 2002:a63:9d8e:: with SMTP id i136-v6mr14549006pgd.288.1527622282317; Tue, 29 May 2018 12:31:22 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1527622282; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=AbKaptBAPLq+BOHmc7CVtohhh9nIJlJLh5qzRIzRz4mp2VYGQNn1dtgRBKmXmI3srS frahQZoOIu9Ml02RuJeyIHOuY43JdPNHGH7Y0HrWfoLoSuwducZGU/Hqx+DgVSJBLEHI CmC48/HiKptfiSXxXuScHq0kg9gHLWFdnnHlX/F6yZbYwp5gDm5NbokUGoJYqN0sYXUv kj25sBguVyGNhQKS8056XJHkS40PbYYggt6JqEBKE5Y2QDu9zdrCt/RSUDzf7kbGO5F2 BxZY8ezHcLcFieT3gbuGhOLWYEPK9wjBfnAMXkTmq7jTgAmf/KJKLu4Yc74gF+uwCNZG yJgQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :arc-authentication-results; bh=kn8h6tecpR2gXNGRP01zo94363+kR6hJUHG24xoF20g=; b=qNj20CdhxpR1yKfjUBVIBRt3ZxzXu9L29hRq+9TEvFj+UK+nLPvC6noFBDq8Z2e8q+ 5h77z6blEmB5rzwf7kqAvlqC8F04P4DWIOhTF81dxH40p9IEMGNBqJ1k0sibpUgMwsMY DCQwG48yalOWw/Jt0xzNJhS+N5u65891Zj7AByEQztOMtnkf9P3XACMIiKbvv14jPv3+ Iia3uNKCuagBDPVZzIdRTF80RHGASxEg8BMy+xZWIJAcitXwYsOIiECARKge1SivTZh5 gXr5Q5HipLzBHi95c3VSIgFSSolv+Gl1MDPztgUmnrNKWK/8zfMOsbGP8Od7Zm9/ABbJ /CmQ== 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 z3-v6si6929758pgn.365.2018.05.29.12.31.07; Tue, 29 May 2018 12:31:22 -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 S966175AbeE2Tal (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 29 May 2018 15:30:41 -0400 Received: from mail.bootlin.com ([62.4.15.54]:46010 "EHLO mail.bootlin.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965761AbeE2Taj (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 May 2018 15:30:39 -0400 Received: by mail.bootlin.com (Postfix, from userid 110) id 3A7312075D; Tue, 29 May 2018 21:30:37 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on mail.bootlin.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT, URIBL_BLOCKED shortcircuit=ham autolearn=disabled version=3.4.0 Received: from bbrezillon (91-160-177-164.subs.proxad.net [91.160.177.164]) by mail.bootlin.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CA4F22071F; Tue, 29 May 2018 21:30:36 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 21:30:36 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Miquel Raynal Cc: Abhishek Sahu , Archit Taneja , Marek Vasut , Masahiro Yamada , Richard Weinberger , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Cyrille Pitchen , Andy Gross , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/16] mtd: rawnand: helper function for setting up ECC configuration Message-ID: <20180529213036.150ed16a@bbrezillon> In-Reply-To: <20180526095807.5caf5800@xps13> References: <1527250904-21988-1-git-send-email-absahu@codeaurora.org> <1527250904-21988-2-git-send-email-absahu@codeaurora.org> <20180526095807.5caf5800@xps13> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.0-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 26 May 2018 10:42:47 +0200 Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hi Abhishek, > > On Fri, 25 May 2018 17:51:29 +0530, Abhishek Sahu > wrote: > > > commit 2c8f8afa7f92 ("mtd: nand: add generic helpers to check, > > match, maximize ECC settings") provides generic helpers which > > drivers can use for setting up ECC parameters. > > > > Since same board can have different ECC strength nand chips so > > following is the logic for setting up ECC strength and ECC step > > size, which can be used by most of the drivers. > > > > 1. If both ECC step size and ECC strength are already set > > (usually by DT) then just check whether this setting > > is supported by NAND controller. > > 2. If NAND_ECC_MAXIMIZE is set, then select maximum ECC strength > > supported by NAND controller. > > 3. Otherwise, try to match the ECC step size and ECC strength closest > > to the chip's requirement. If available OOB size can't fit the chip > > requirement then select maximum ECC strength which can be fit with > > available OOB size. > > > > This patch introduces nand_ecc_choose_conf function which calls the > > required helper functions for the above logic. The drivers can use > > this single function instead of calling the 3 helper functions > > individually. > > > > CC: Masahiro Yamada > > Signed-off-by: Abhishek Sahu > > --- > > * Changes from v2: > > > > 1. Renamed function to nand_ecc_choose_conf. > > 2. Minor code reorganization to remove warning and 2 function calls > > for nand_maximize_ecc. > > > > * Changes from v1: > > NEW PATCH > > > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h | 3 +++ > > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c > > index 72f3a89..e52019d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c > > @@ -6249,6 +6249,37 @@ int nand_maximize_ecc(struct nand_chip *chip, > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nand_maximize_ecc); > > > > +/** > > + * nand_ecc_choose_conf - Set the ECC strength and ECC step size > > + * @chip: nand chip info structure > > + * @caps: ECC engine caps info structure > > + * @oobavail: OOB size that the ECC engine can use > > + * > > + * Choose the ECC configuration according to following logic > > + * > > + * 1. If both ECC step size and ECC strength are already set (usually by DT) > > + * then check if it is supported by this controller. > > + * 2. If NAND_ECC_MAXIMIZE is set, then select maximum ECC strength. > > + * 3. Otherwise, try to match the ECC step size and ECC strength closest > > + * to the chip's requirement. If available OOB size can't fit the chip > > + * requirement then fallback to the maximum ECC step size and ECC strength. > > + * > > + * On success, the chosen ECC settings are set. > > + */ > > +int nand_ecc_choose_conf(struct nand_chip *chip, > > + const struct nand_ecc_caps *caps, int oobavail) > > +{ > > + if (chip->ecc.size && chip->ecc.strength) > > + return nand_check_ecc_caps(chip, caps, oobavail); > > + > > + if (!(chip->ecc.options & NAND_ECC_MAXIMIZE) && > > + !nand_match_ecc_req(chip, caps, oobavail)) > > + return 0; > > + > > + return nand_maximize_ecc(chip, caps, oobavail); > > I personally don't mind if nand_maximize_ecc() is called twice in > the function if it clarifies the logic. Maybe the following will be > more clear for the user? > > if (chip->ecc.size && chip->ecc.strength) > return nand_check_ecc_caps(chip, caps, oobavail); > > if (chip->ecc.options & NAND_ECC_MAXIMIZE) > return nand_maximize_ecc(chip, caps, oobavail); > > if (!nand_match_ecc_req(chip, caps, oobavail)) > return 0; > > return nand_maximize_ecc(chip, caps, oobavail); I personally don't mind, and it seems Masahiro wanted to keep the logic he had used in the denali driver. > > Also, I'm not sure we should just error out when nand_check_ecc_caps() > fails. What about something more robust, like: > > int ret; > > if (chip->ecc.size && chip->ecc.strength) { > ret = nand_check_ecc_caps(chip, caps, oobavail); > if (ret) > goto maximize_ecc; Nope. When someone asked for a specific ECC config by passing the nand-ecc-xxx props we should apply it or return an erro if it's not supported. People passing those props should now what the ECC engine supports and pick one valid values. > > return 0; > } > > if (chip->ecc.options & NAND_ECC_MAXIMIZE) > goto maximize_ecc; > > ret = nand_match_ecc_req(chip, caps, oobavail); > if (ret) > goto maximize_ecc; > > return 0; > > maximize_ecc: > return nand_maximize_ecc(chip, caps, oobavail); >