On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 17:05 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
(2) Also selection of ecc-scheme mainly depends on NAND device parameter
(like density, page-size, oobsize) which remain constant for a device
(all NAND partitions). Thus all partitions should use *same* ecc-scheme
preferable
Dear Javier Martinez Canillas,
On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 13:27:25 +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-igep0020.dts
b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-igep0020.dts
index d5cc792..4229e94 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-igep0020.dts
+++
Hi,
CCing Pekon Gupta pe...@ti.com
2013/12/2 Thomas Petazzoni thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com:
Dear Javier Martinez Canillas,
On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 13:27:25 +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-igep0020.dts
b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-igep0020.dts
Hi,
From: Enric Balletbo Serra [mailto:eballe...@gmail.com]
CCing Pekon Gupta pe...@ti.com
2013/12/2 Thomas Petazzoni thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com:
Dear Javier Martinez Canillas,
On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 13:27:25 +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
diff --git
Dear Gupta, Pekon,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:56:09 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
A query Why are you going backward from BCH8 to HAM1 ?
HAM1 is just kept for legacy reasons, it's not at all recommended for new
development. As some field results have shown that devices with
HAM1 become un-usable
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:56:09 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
A query Why are you going backward from BCH8 to HAM1 ?
HAM1 is just kept for legacy reasons, it's not at all recommended for new
development. As some field results have
Hi all,
2013/12/2 Gupta, Pekon pe...@ti.com:
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:56:09 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
A query Why are you going backward from BCH8 to HAM1 ?
HAM1 is just kept for legacy reasons, it's not at all recommended for
Dear Enric Balletbo Serra,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 16:39:09 +0100, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:
Thanks for the explanations to all.
Although the new ECC schema breaks the compatibility between the board
files and new DT based kernel, I think we should use BCH8 scheme.
Sorry, because I had not
On 12/02/2013 10:51 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
Dear Enric Balletbo Serra,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 16:39:09 +0100, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:
Thanks for the explanations to all.
Although the new ECC schema breaks the compatibility between the board
files and new DT based kernel, I think we
Dear Tom Rini,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:00:35 -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Although the new ECC schema breaks the compatibility between the board
files and new DT based kernel, I think we should use BCH8 scheme.
Sorry, because I had not realized that this was configurable in
u-boot, so I think,
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:00:35 -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Although the new ECC schema breaks the compatibility between the board
files and new DT based kernel, I think we should use BCH8 scheme.
Sorry, because I had not realized
Dear Gupta, Pekon,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 16:13:56 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
Yes, at-least OMAP3 arch u-boot should still supports 'nandecc'.
The infrastructure is still in place, however the command 'nandecc' is
deprecated in newer versions.
References in mainline u-boot:
On 12/02/2013 11:13 AM, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:00:35 -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Although the new ECC schema breaks the compatibility between the board
files and new DT based kernel, I think we should use BCH8
Hi Pekon,
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Gupta, Pekon pe...@ti.com wrote:
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:00:35 -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Although the new ECC schema breaks the compatibility between the board
files and new DT based
On 12/02/2013 11:21 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
Hi Pekon,
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Gupta, Pekon pe...@ti.com wrote:
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:00:35 -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Although the new ECC schema breaks the
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On 12/02/2013 11:21 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
Hi Pekon,
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Gupta, Pekon pe...@ti.com wrote:
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:00:35
On 12/02/2013 11:46 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On 12/02/2013 11:21 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
Hi Pekon,
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Gupta, Pekon pe...@ti.com wrote:
From: Thomas Petazzoni
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
Dear Gupta, Pekon,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 16:13:56 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
Yes, at-least OMAP3 arch u-boot should still supports 'nandecc'.
The infrastructure is still in place, however the command 'nandecc' is
deprecated in
Hi Pekon
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Gupta, Pekon pe...@ti.com wrote:
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
Dear Gupta, Pekon,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 16:13:56 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
Yes, at-least OMAP3 arch u-boot should still supports 'nandecc'.
The
On 12/02/2013 12:05 PM, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com]
Dear Gupta, Pekon,
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 16:13:56 +, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
Yes, at-least OMAP3 arch u-boot should still supports 'nandecc'.
The infrastructure is still in place,
So coming back to the specific problem here.
I think we need 'nandecc' back in u-boot till atleast all systems have
migrated to BCH16 or whatever highest ecc-scheme which can be
supported on OMAP devices.
Forgot to mention, one more way of updating boot-loaders with
different ecc-scheme via
On 12/02/2013 12:46 PM, Gupta, Pekon wrote:
So coming back to the specific problem here.
I think we need 'nandecc' back in u-boot till atleast all systems have
migrated to BCH16 or whatever highest ecc-scheme which can be
supported on OMAP devices.
Forgot to mention, one more way of
Hi Enric,
Thanks a lot for fixing this.
When adding NAND support for the IGEP boards I used as a base the
example from Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/gpmc-nand.txt and I
wrongly assumed that bch8 was also the ECC scheme used in the legacy
IGEP board file. Sorry for the inconvenience.
On
23 matches
Mail list logo
