On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 07:02:08 +0000 Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagas...@xilinx.com> wrote:
> > > > Can you please run nandbiterrs (availaible in mtd-utils). I fear your > > device won't pass the test. > Yes, nandbiterror test is passing till 24bit, after that it is failing. Can you paste the output of nandbiterrs please? > > > > > But we are hitting this because of erased page reading(needed in case of > > > ubifs). > > > > > > > > > > > Don't you have a bit (or several bits) reporting when the ECC engine > > > > was not able to > > correct > > > > data? I you do, you should base the "detect bitflips in erase pages" > > > > logic on this information. > > > Bit reporting for several bit errors is there only for Hamming(1bit > > > correction and 2bit > > detection) but not in BCH. > > > > > > > Then I tend to agree with Miquel: your ECC engine is broken, and I'm > > not even sure how to deal with that yet. > So as per the Miquel's suggestion, can I proceed to add the below one? > "you should re-read the page in raw mode and check for the number of bitflips > manually (thanks to the helpers in the core). Again, if the number of BF is > above 16, we can assume the page is bad and increment ->ecc.failed > accordingly." But that's just partially fixing the problem. And you didn't answer my previous question: what happens when you configure the ECC engine in, say 12bit/1024 and you end up with uncorrectable errors (more than 12 bitflips in a 1k block). What's the number reported ECC_ERR_CNT? Is it set to 13?
