From patchwork Sun Oct 28 20:47:42 2012 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jamie Lentin X-Patchwork-Id: 1658981 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork-linux-arm@patchwork.kernel.org Delivered-To: patchwork-process-083081@patchwork1.kernel.org Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) by patchwork1.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F4843FCF7 for ; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:50:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1TSZmq-0002gn-GZ; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:48:48 +0000 Received: from marmot.wormnet.eu ([2a03:9800:10:2d:3203:b3a5:8bdc:5b68]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1TSZlg-0002B1-TX for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:47:38 +0000 Received: from mijo.vandergast.wormnet.eu ([80.229.158.163] helo=bunsen.vandergast.wormnet.eu) by marmot.wormnet.eu with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TSZlY-0003Ap-LP; Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:47:28 +0000 From: Jamie Lentin To: Andrew Lunn , Jason Cooper , Arnd Bergmann Subject: [PATCH] ARM: kirkwood: Increase NAND chip-delay for DNS-320 Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:47:42 +0000 Message-Id: <1351457262-11506-1-git-send-email-jm@lentin.co.uk> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.10.4 X-Spam-Note: CRM114 invocation failed X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 on merlin.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (-1.9 points) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Cc: Jamie Lentin , linux ARM X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+patchwork-linux-arm=patchwork.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org The default chip-delay of 25ns is a bit too tight for some DNS-320's, increase to 35ns. Signed-off-by: Jamie Lentin --- I now own 2 DNS-320's, the first of which is happy with a mainline kernel, the second fills the console with "Bad eraseblock xxx at 0x00000xxxxxxx" for every eraseblock and refuses to access the NAND. Beyond this they appear identical, and report the same NAND chip (I haven't physically checked that it's the same, however). The patch below fixes it, however:- * Is there something else I should be trying, rather than potentially masking the problem? * Is chip-delay too low for kirkwood generally? Cheers, arch/arm/boot/dts/kirkwood-dns320.dts | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/kirkwood-dns320.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/kirkwood-dns320.dts index 5bb0bf3..abe17a4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/kirkwood-dns320.dts +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/kirkwood-dns320.dts @@ -50,5 +50,9 @@ clock-frequency = <166666667>; status = "okay"; }; + + nand@3000000 { + chip-delay = <35>; + }; }; };