On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 02:12:41 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
> Hi, Marek
>
> On 1/20/2015 7:03 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Friday, December 19, 2014 at 05:39:13 AM, Peng Fan wrote:
> >> If ecc chunk data size is 512 and oobsize is bigger than 512, there is
> >> a chance that block_mark_bit_offse
Hi, Marek
On 1/20/2015 7:03 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Friday, December 19, 2014 at 05:39:13 AM, Peng Fan wrote:
If ecc chunk data size is 512 and oobsize is bigger than 512, there is
a chance that block_mark_bit_offset conflicts with bch ecc area.
The following graph is modified from kernel gp
On Friday, December 19, 2014 at 05:39:13 AM, Peng Fan wrote:
> If ecc chunk data size is 512 and oobsize is bigger than 512, there is
> a chance that block_mark_bit_offset conflicts with bch ecc area.
>
> The following graph is modified from kernel gpmi-nand.c driver with each
> data block 512 byt
Hi Marek,
And this one.
On 12/19/2014 12:39 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
If ecc chunk data size is 512 and oobsize is bigger than 512, there is
a chance that block_mark_bit_offset conflicts with bch ecc area.
The following graph is modified from kernel gpmi-nand.c driver with each data
block 512 bytes.
If ecc chunk data size is 512 and oobsize is bigger than 512, there is
a chance that block_mark_bit_offset conflicts with bch ecc area.
The following graph is modified from kernel gpmi-nand.c driver with each data
block 512 bytes.
We can see that Block Mark conflicts with ecc area from bch view.
W
5 matches
Mail list logo