On 21.11.12 18:04, Tom Rini wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 02:25:23PM +0100, Andreas Bießmann wrote: >> Dear Ilya Yanok, >> >> On 07.11.2012 00:06, Ilya Yanok wrote: >>> From: Mansoor Ahamed <mansoor.aha...@ti.com> >>> >>> This patch adds support for BCH8 error correction code to omap_gpmc >>> driver. We use GPMC to generate codes/syndromes but we need ELM to find >>> error locations from given syndrome. >>> >> >> first of all, I wonder why this is so different than the kernel >> implementation for BCH. I mean the API (and content) of this and commit >> 8d602cf50d3bba864bc1438f486b626df69c87b3 mainline linux seems to differ. >> The main question coming to mind is: Is the resulting OOB layout >> compatible then? > > I think this has been mostly addressed now, but for clarity: > - We do NOT want to have > 1 layout used per NAND chip unless we must > (historically we did because we had ROM that couldn't use >1bit ECC). > - We DO want to utilize the HW as this is the only easy way to get a > match with the BCH constants the ROM uses. > - There are corresponding kernel patches already posted and working > their way along.
I'm fine with all these three points. My question came up when I looked into this deeply the very first time cause BCH4/8 support was missing for OMAP35xx/AM37xx devices. I do have now working support for these (hw assisted BCH but sw correction) like the kernel does. It needs some final polishing however I will send it these days as RFC, would be great to get some feedback. Best regards Andreas Bießmann _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
