Patchwork [U-Boot] nand: Don't call adjust_size_for_badblocks for erase

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Scott Wood
Date June 20, 2013, 5:52 p.m.
Message ID <1371750758-9589-1-git-send-email-scottwood@freescale.com>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/253044/
State Accepted
Headers show

Comments

Scott Wood - June 20, 2013, 5:52 p.m.
adjust_size_for_badblocks reduces the the operation size to account
for the block skipping done by the read/write functions when an
interval (partition name or whole chip) is specified rather than a data
amount.

Erase does not do block skipping, except for erase.spread which takes
a data amount rather than an interval (and thus already does not call
adjust_size_for_badblocks).  Calling adjust_size_for_badblocks when
block skipping is not done means that if bad blocks are present,
the "nand erase.part" and "nand erase.chip" commands will fail to erase
blocks at the end of the interval.

Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Cc: Harvey Chapman <hchapman@3gfp.com>
---
 common/cmd_nand.c |    9 +--------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
Heiko Schocher - June 21, 2013, 4:19 a.m.
Hello Scott,

Am 20.06.2013 19:52, schrieb Scott Wood:
> adjust_size_for_badblocks reduces the the operation size to account

nitpicking:
please only one "the".

> for the block skipping done by the read/write functions when an
> interval (partition name or whole chip) is specified rather than a data
> amount.
> 
> Erase does not do block skipping, except for erase.spread which takes
> a data amount rather than an interval (and thus already does not call
> adjust_size_for_badblocks).  Calling adjust_size_for_badblocks when
> block skipping is not done means that if bad blocks are present,
> the "nand erase.part" and "nand erase.chip" commands will fail to erase
> blocks at the end of the interval.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
> Cc: Harvey Chapman <hchapman@3gfp.com>
> ---
>  common/cmd_nand.c |    9 +--------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)

Acked-by: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>

bye,
Heiko
Scott Wood - June 21, 2013, 4:48 p.m.
On 06/20/2013 11:19:19 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Scott,
> 
> Am 20.06.2013 19:52, schrieb Scott Wood:
> > adjust_size_for_badblocks reduces the the operation size to account
> 
> nitpicking:
> please only one "the".

Thanks, I'll fix when applying.

-Scott

Patch

diff --git a/common/cmd_nand.c b/common/cmd_nand.c
index 8b1e01a..886212a 100644
--- a/common/cmd_nand.c
+++ b/common/cmd_nand.c
@@ -426,7 +426,7 @@  static int raw_access(nand_info_t *nand, ulong addr, loff_t off, ulong count,
 }
 
 /* Adjust a chip/partition size down for bad blocks so we don't
- * read/write/erase past the end of a chip/partition by accident.
+ * read/write past the end of a chip/partition by accident.
  */
 static void adjust_size_for_badblocks(loff_t *size, loff_t offset, int dev)
 {
@@ -546,7 +546,6 @@  static int do_nand(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[])
 		int scrub = !strncmp(cmd, "scrub", 5);
 		int spread = 0;
 		int args = 2;
-		int adjust_size = 0;
 		const char *scrub_warn =
 			"Warning: "
 			"scrub option will erase all factory set bad blocks!\n"
@@ -563,10 +562,8 @@  static int do_nand(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[])
 				spread = 1;
 			} else if (!strcmp(&cmd[5], ".part")) {
 				args = 1;
-				adjust_size = 1;
 			} else if (!strcmp(&cmd[5], ".chip")) {
 				args = 0;
-				adjust_size = 1;
 			} else {
 				goto usage;
 			}
@@ -586,10 +583,6 @@  static int do_nand(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[])
 				 &maxsize) != 0)
 			return 1;
 
-		/* size is unspecified */
-		if (adjust_size && !scrub)
-			adjust_size_for_badblocks(&size, off, dev);
-
 		nand = &nand_info[dev];
 
 		memset(&opts, 0, sizeof(opts));