<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [PATCH 1/1] NDFC: add support for alternate ECC format for ndfc</TITLE>
<META content="text/html; charset=unicode" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.7600.16490"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr id=idOWAReplyText17815>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>Hi Sean:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I will withdraw this patch. I had a talk with the U-Boot guys. The reason for this</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>patch was to support those guys that had their ECC ordering at (213) on the older</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>version of the kernel. Upgrading to (123) may be problematic. Since without a jtag</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>it would be a bit complex. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I still think this NAND_ECC_SMC define is somewhat missleading. Given that</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>both 1-2-3 and 2-1-3 are supported by the correction routine.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Feng</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> Sean MacLennan [mailto:smaclennan@pikatech.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sat 2/20/2010 5:11 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Feng Kan<BR><B>Cc:</B> linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; Feng Kan<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [PATCH 1/1] NDFC: add support for alternate ECC format for ndfc<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:11:18 -0800<BR>Feng Kan <fkan@amcc.com> wrote:<BR><BR>> This is to lock down the ordering in the correction routine against<BR>> the calculate routine. Otherwise, incorrect define would cause ECC<BR>> errors.<BR><BR>Did you actually find a 44x PPC core that is not NAND_ECC_SMS format?<BR><BR>Cheers,<BR> Sean<BR></FONT></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>