Dear Paul B. Henson, > On 4/25/2013 6:13 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > I didn't really track the thread and I'm plenty busy, besides I had quite > > a clash with Trent in another thread, sorry about me being plenty > > unpleasant. Anyway, can you please sum what is going on and what you > > came up with? > > Most of the analysis came from Trent, but I can try to summarize the > findings. > > One problem is that the current mxsboot misaligns the FCB's: > > for (i = 0; i < STRIDE_PAGES * STRIDE_COUNT; i += STRIDE_PAGES) { > offset = i * nand_writesize; > memcpy(buf + offset, fcbblock, nand_writesize + nand_oobsize); > } > > The code writes out nand_writesize+nand_oobsize bytes, but updates the > offset only by nand_writesize, so every FCB but the first one isn't in > the right place: > > hexdump of the u-boot image: > 00000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 d6 fc ff ff > > |................| > > 00000010 46 43 42 20 00 00 00 01 50 3c 19 06 00 00 00 00 |FCB > ....P<......| > > 00020000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 d6 fc ff ff > > |................| > > 00020010 46 43 42 20 00 00 00 01 50 3c 19 06 00 00 00 00 |FCB > ....P<......| > > The first FCB block is at offset 0. The second FCB block is at > offset 0x20000, 64 * 2048 bytes, not 64 * 2112 bytes, no OOB > data. The next two FCBs are at 0x40000 and 0x60000, again not where > they should be if they contained the OOB data. > > Another problem is that the OOB section gets zeroed out.
Ok, I see the problem, but I don't see easy solution. For some reason, the BCH doesn't compute the same ECC as mx28_nand_parity_13_8() when writing regular data, do you know why? Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot