From patchwork Fri Aug 20 21:01:47 2010 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Brian Norris X-Patchwork-Id: 62319 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66AB7B70DB for ; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 07:03:16 +1000 (EST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1OmYiw-00010v-Hh; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:02:02 +0000 Received: from mms3.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.19]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1OmYit-00010D-Dy for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:02:00 +0000 Received: from [10.9.200.131] by MMS3.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom SMTP Relay (Email Firewall v6.3.2)); Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:01:49 -0700 X-Server-Uuid: B55A25B1-5D7D-41F8-BC53-C57E7AD3C201 Received: from mail-irva-12.broadcom.com (10.11.16.101) by IRVEXCHHUB01.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.200.131) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.2.247.2; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:01:49 -0700 Received: from [10.12.160.50] (ld-irv-0074.broadcom.com [10.12.160.50]) by mail-irva-12.broadcom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D6469CA9; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:01:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C6EED3B.4000001@broadcom.com> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:01:47 -0700 From: "Brian Norris" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "David Woodhouse" Subject: Re: Bad assumption about ID field definition for Samsung NAND? References: <20100818180538.GA12238@code-monkey.de> <4C6C6BFC.9020408@broadcom.com> <20100819171558.GA8536@code-monkey.de> <4C6DAFFD.4040602@broadcom.com> <20100820134316.GA437@code-monkey.de> <4C6EBE90.2090604@broadcom.com> <1282334008.25239.91.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1282334008.25239.91.camel@localhost> X-WSS-ID: 607032B73KC84129102-01-01 X-CRM114-Version: 20090807-BlameThorstenAndJenny ( TRE 0.7.6 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20100820_170159_695893_CB108653 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 21.21 ) X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 on bombadil.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (-0.0 points) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain Cc: "r64343@freescale.com" , Kevin Cernekee , Tilman Sauerbeck , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" X-BeenThere: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-mtd-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-mtd-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.infradead.org > Can I have a signed-off-by for it? I don't know what's "legal" here. I'm appending the patch with a sign-off for me and Tilman (since Tilman authored it). Hopefully that's ok. > Brian, I have a distinct impression that there's at least one more patch > from you that I really ought to be sending to Linus for 2.6.36, but I > can't find it right now. Other than this and what's already in > mtd-2.6.git, is there anything else? I'm really no expert on how inclusion for different versions goes; I just send 'em to you! Anyway, this patch is *very* important: * [PATCH] mtd: nand: Fix regression in BBM detection http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031594.html It addresses issues I overlooked with a lot of Hynix small-page NAND (and others). Other patches - they are ready, but not as important: * Spansion ORNAND http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031603.html * New Samsung MLC OOB sizes http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031621.html No one has decided between these two (it's a "choose one or the other" situation). They may or may not be ready: mtd: nand: Expand nand_ecc_layout, deprecate ioctl ECCGETLAYOUT Cover page: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031591.html Choice 1: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031593.html Choice 2: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031598.html Explanation: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031619.html And since you asked, the trivial... Indentation errors :) http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031588.html You already got this one, I believe: Fixing a typo in on a buswidth option http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-August/031518.html Thanks for looking out for me :) Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------- Apparently, the check for a 6-byte ID string is NOT sufficient to determine whether or not a Samsung chip uses their new MLC detection scheme or the old, standard scheme. This adds a condition to check cell type. Signed-off-by: Tilman Sauerbeck Signed-off-by: Brian Norris --- drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c index a3c7473..172a299 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c @@ -2866,6 +2866,7 @@ static struct nand_flash_dev *nand_get_flash_type(struct mtd_info *mtd, */ if (id_data[0] == id_data[6] && id_data[1] == id_data[7] && id_data[0] == NAND_MFR_SAMSUNG && + (chip->cellinfo & NAND_CI_CELLTYPE_MSK) && id_data[5] != 0x00) { /* Calc pagesize */ mtd->writesize = 2048 << (extid & 0x03);