Re: [RESEND v5] mtd: nand_bbt: scan for next free bbt block if writing bbt fails

From: Boris Brezillon
Date: Mon Aug 08 2016 - 10:16:46 EST


Hi Kyle,

On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:01:50 -0500
Kyle Roeschley <kyle.roeschley@xxxxxx> wrote:

> If erasing or writing the BBT fails, we should mark the current BBT
> block as bad and use the BBT descriptor to scan for the next available
> unused block in the BBT. We should only return a failure if there isn't
> any space left.
>
> Based on original code implemented by Jeff Westfahl
> <jeff.westfahl@xxxxxx>.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kyle Roeschley <kyle.roeschley@xxxxxx>
> Suggested-by: Jeff Westfahl <jeff.westfahl@xxxxxx>
> ---
> v5: De-duplicate bad block handling
>
> v4: Don't ignore write protection while marking bad BBT blocks
> Correctly call block_markbad
> Minor cleanups
>
> v3: Don't overload mtd->priv
> Keep nand_erase_nand from erroring on protected BBT blocks
>
> v2: Mark OOB area in each block as well as BBT
> Avoid marking read-only, bad address, or known bad blocks as bad
>
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
> index 2fbb523..c9255f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_bbt.c
> @@ -620,7 +620,7 @@ static int write_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *buf,
> {
> struct nand_chip *this = mtd_to_nand(mtd);
> struct erase_info einfo;
> - int i, res, chip = 0;
> + int i, res, chip = 0, found_bad_block = 0;
> int bits, startblock, dir, page, offs, numblocks, sft, sftmsk;
> int nrchips, pageoffs, ooboffs;
> uint8_t msk[4];
> @@ -663,6 +663,27 @@ static int write_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *buf,
> goto write;
> }
>
> +next:
> + if (found_bad_block) {
> + /*
> + * We found a bad block on the last loop iteration.
> + * Mark it as such and see if there's another block
> + * available in the BBT area.
> + */
> + int block = page >>
> + (this->bbt_erase_shift - this->page_shift);
> + pr_info("nand_bbt: failed to erase block %d when writing BBT\n",
> + block);
> + bbt_mark_entry(this, block, BBT_BLOCK_WORN);
> +
> + res = this->block_markbad(mtd, to);
> + if (res)
> + pr_warn("nand_bbt: error %d while marking block %d bad\n",
> + res, block);
> + td->pages[chip] = -1;
> + found_bad_block = 0;
> + }
> +

Yet another label in this already non-trivial function. Can we do
something like that [1][2] instead?

Regards,

Boris

> /*
> * Automatic placement of the bad block table. Search direction
> * top -> down?
> @@ -787,14 +808,21 @@ static int write_bbt(struct mtd_info *mtd, uint8_t *buf,
> einfo.addr = to;
> einfo.len = 1 << this->bbt_erase_shift;
> res = nand_erase_nand(mtd, &einfo, 1);
> - if (res < 0)
> + if (res == -EIO) {
> + found_bad_block = 1;
> + goto next;
> + } else if (res) {
> goto outerr;
> + }
>
> - res = scan_write_bbt(mtd, to, len, buf,
> - td->options & NAND_BBT_NO_OOB ? NULL :
> - &buf[len]);
> - if (res < 0)
> + res = scan_write_bbt(mtd, to, len, buf, td->options &
> + NAND_BBT_NO_OOB ? NULL : &buf[len]);
> + if (res == -EIO) {
> + found_bad_block = 1;
> + goto next;
> + } else if (res) {
> goto outerr;
> + }
>
> pr_info("Bad block table written to 0x%012llx, version 0x%02X\n",
> (unsigned long long)to, td->version[chip]);

[1]http://code.bulix.org/3xbnwr-104986
[2]http://code.bulix.org/e16nvo-104988