Hi! > > Maybe I figured it out. Unfortunately, it is only compile tested. Does > > it look approximately right? > > Yep that's definitely better. Just one thing missing (see below), > otherwise it looks good.
I'm copying from tango_nand, therefore I had to check tango_nand, too.
static int check_erased_page(struct nand_chip *chip, u8 *buf)
{
...
res = nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk(buf, pkt_size, ecc, ecc_size,
meta, meta_len,
chip->ecc.strength);
if (res < 0)
mtd->ecc_stats.failed++;
else
mtd->ecc_stats.corrected += res;
bitflips = max(res, bitflips);
...
return bitflips;
}
static int tango_read_page(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip,
u8 *buf, int oob_required, int page)
{
...
res = decode_error_report(nfc);
if (res < 0) {
chip->ecc.read_oob_raw(mtd, chip, page);
res = check_erased_page(chip, buf);
}
return res;
}
So nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk() returns < 0 (failed ECC), but then we
perform max() with bitflips (lets say 1, correctable ECC) and return
1? tango_read_page then returns 1 (correctable ECC) forgetting about
failed ECC...?
Best regards,
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
