Charles,
Thanks so much for getting back to me. I should have sent this out
sooner and I do apologize. I was out of the office all of last week at
Embedded Systems Conference in San Francisco and spent the entire week
before that getting ready for the show.
Now I'm back to working on this issue.
I checked and my YAFFS device is being set as follows:
- block size is = 0x40000
- nbytesPerChunk = 512
- nChunksPerBlock = 496 ( 0x40000 / (512 + 16) )
- nReservedBlocks = 3
- startBlock = 1
- endBlock = 31
- useNANDECC = 0
- nShortOpCaches = 0
I enabled all sorts of debug output throughout the driver. It appears
that garbage collection *should* be working fine. When a garbage
collection cycle happens, it appears that YAFFS grabs the first block of
flash. It copies the data from the block to another section of flash,
and then erases the entire block. Subsequent garbage collections start
with the next sequential block of flash.
Two things appear a little bit fishy to me:
1) The entire block isn't copied before erasing.
I put messages in the code that say things like, "copying page %d" in
the function yaffs_GarbageCollectBlock(). The first block that gets
collected is block one and it starts by copying page 496. Then, pages
are copied in succession up to 735. Notice, that it didn't copy the
entire block's worth of pages. Maybe this is normal. Perhaps YAFFS split
the file data up between different blocks of flash. You will have to
tell me. I would have expected it to copy all the way up to page 992
(the last page in the block). That is, of course, assuming that YAFFS
would put as much data as possible into a block.
2) dev->nErasedBlocks doesn't appear to get updated.
The first time the garbage collector runs, I see this message:
"yaffs: GC erasedBlocks 30 aggressive 0"
After that, *every* time it runs, I see the same message:
"yaffs: GC erasedBlocks 29 aggressive 0"
I would expect to see the "erasedBlocks" output increase or decrease.
I guess right now I'm just looking for some advice on how to proceed. As
I mentioned before, I *only* seem to have problems when the garbage
collector runs. Turning it off lets me burn huge files into the
filesystem without trouble.
The problem caused by the garbage collection seems to be loss of data
within the file. To try and help me figure out what was going on, I
created a large text file that just goes something like this:
line #0
line #1
line #2
....
....
line #102397
line #102398
line #102399
I then copy this file from a FAT formatted Compact Flash card into the
YAFFS partition.
When I look at the size of the file after the copy, YAFFS reports to me
what would be the correct size. However, the md5sum of the file in the
YAFFS partition does not match that of the file in the FAT partition.
Further more, when I textually dump the file to the serial port and
capture it, I can see that huge chunks of data are missing in the YAFFS
version of the file. The dumped file looks something like:
line #0
line #1
....
....
line #33307
line #33308
line #3330ne #43891
line #43892
line #43893
....
There are a couple of more gaps in the data like that. Might this have
something to do with those "missing" blocks of data that I observed not
being copied before the block erase?
Again, if I disable all garbage collection, I can burn the exact same
file with no trouble. The md5sum will match, dumping it to the serial
port and comparing it on my desktop will show me that the file was truly
copied without error.
Any help or advice on where to look next would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
--mike
Charles Manning wrote:
> Mike
>
> You're definitely on the right track.
>
> When GC goes wrong you can bet on it being a geometry issue.
>
>
>
>>Eventually, I determined that this was happening when the garbage
>>collector ran. To verify, I modified the yaffs_CheckGarbageCollection()
>>function to just return YAFFS_OK without doing any garbage collection of
>>any kind. As soon as I did this, all of my problems went away.
>>
>>I do not believe that this is a bug in the YAFFS code. Rather, I think
>>the problem has to do with my definition of a block size and what is
>>physically hooked up on my board.
>>
>>I have two NOR (StrataFlash) devices hooked up together to look like one
>>device. Is there anything special that I need to do with this situation?
>>
>>Currently, each individual chip has a block size of 0x20000 bytes. So, I
>>have been reporting to YAFFS that the block size of the device is
>>0x40000 bytes. That way, when YAFFS wants to erase a block, I should be
>>erasing one block from each chip and there won't be any overlap.
>
>
> First off, please be warned that YAFFS was not really designed for NOR, and
> in particular does not handle erase suspend, but still is being used for
> quite a few shipping products.
>
> You're doing the right thing with the two blocks being treated as one large
> block (ie. your 2x128kB blocks look like one 256 kB block).
>
> Now NOR (typically) does not have spare/oob bytes and pages so you will have
> to emulate this. Each page (a page == a chunk) is 512bytes data + 16 bytes
> spare = 528 bytes.
> So each block should have 256kB/528 = 496 pages.
>
> Your flash access code should then be doing a mapping to make sure the data
> and spare eareas are all addressed correctly.
>
> Check that your device, once initialised, has
>
> nChunksPerBlock = 496
>
> I've seen this approach work fine on systems with 64kB blocks and 128kB
> blocks. I have not yet seen it tried on 256kB blocks. It should all work OK
> since I don't think there any limitations that will hurt.
>
>
> -- CHarles
--
Michael Erickson
Senior Software Engineer
Logic Product Development
(612) 436-5118
mailto:mikee@logicpd.com
http://www.logicpd.com
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and
is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you
should delete this message and are hereby notified that any
disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the
taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
(text/plain)