I have not read the whole OneNAND spec yet.
On Wednesday 15 June 2005 00:39, Nick Bane wrote:
> > > I note the mtd thread in Feb started by samsung (starting from
> >
> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2005-February/01186
> > 0.html). The mood seemed to be to split off OneNAND from generic
> > nand as the access is so different. I was unclear whether this
> > presents OneNAND as non generic NAND mtd technology possibly
> > requiring changes to yaffs eg the test for the device being an
> > "mtd-nand" at mount time.
> >
> > I'm not sure either. I have just skimmed the datasheet, but it might be
> > possible to setup a NAND compatible API
You could even set up a NAND interface to NOR if you were really keen :-).
For OneNAND, the sector management might break "NAND-ness".
>
> It looks like there are only 2 bytes of user usable data in the "spare"
> area. Although yaffs won't need to do so much ecc it looks like yaffs will
> have a problem with that little spare space unless one can use bigger
> virtual blocks. Charles?
It might be possbile to subvert some of the other bytes (eg. sector number).
I'd be tempted to run this stuff as 2k pages with YAFFS2. That would give
more bytes/chunk. Still might not be enough though.
Samsung: If you're reading this, what would ne nice, IMHO, would be the
ability to bypass the OneNAND interface and use part of the device as a raw
NAND (perhaps with HWECC) for file system purposes and some as NOR equivalent
for use as boot sectors etc. Perhaps this is possible.
-- Charles
(text/plain)