All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
	david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] UBI: power cut emulation for testing
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2015 22:25:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150405202559.GA3500@amd> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55219677.6090900@nod.at>

On Sun 2015-04-05 22:09:27, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 05.04.2015 um 22:04 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > On Sun 2015-04-05 21:49:27, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> >> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> >>> On Thu 2015-03-26 23:59:50, david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at wrote:
> >>>> Emulate random power cuts by switching device to ro after a number of
> >>>> writes to allow simple power cut testing with nand-sim.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maximum and minimum number of successful writes before power cut and
> >>>> what kind of writes (EC header, VID header or none) to interrupt
> >>>> configurable via debugfs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: David Oberhollenzer <david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> V2: Remove broken check to prevent multiple triggering
> >>>
> >>> Does NAND always finish write of full block during powerfail?
> >>
> >> Not sure if I correctly understand your question.
> >> Unless you don't have special hardware a write can be interrupted and
> >> can cause problems.
> > 
> > But this only emulates fail after a full block written, no?
> 
> Emulating all aspects of real hardware is almost impossible.

I guess so. So maybe warning in the documentation somewhere that real
hardware is nastier than designed-to-be-nasty emulation would be
nice..?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at,
	"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] UBI: power cut emulation for testing
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2015 22:25:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150405202559.GA3500@amd> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55219677.6090900@nod.at>

On Sun 2015-04-05 22:09:27, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 05.04.2015 um 22:04 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > On Sun 2015-04-05 21:49:27, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> >> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> >>> On Thu 2015-03-26 23:59:50, david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at wrote:
> >>>> Emulate random power cuts by switching device to ro after a number of
> >>>> writes to allow simple power cut testing with nand-sim.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maximum and minimum number of successful writes before power cut and
> >>>> what kind of writes (EC header, VID header or none) to interrupt
> >>>> configurable via debugfs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: David Oberhollenzer <david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> V2: Remove broken check to prevent multiple triggering
> >>>
> >>> Does NAND always finish write of full block during powerfail?
> >>
> >> Not sure if I correctly understand your question.
> >> Unless you don't have special hardware a write can be interrupted and
> >> can cause problems.
> > 
> > But this only emulates fail after a full block written, no?
> 
> Emulating all aspects of real hardware is almost impossible.

I guess so. So maybe warning in the documentation somewhere that real
hardware is nastier than designed-to-be-nasty emulation would be
nice..?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-05 20:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-26 22:59 [PATCH V2] UBI: power cut emulation for testing david.oberhollenzer
2015-04-05 19:31 ` Pavel Machek
2015-04-05 19:49   ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-05 19:49     ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-05 20:04     ` Pavel Machek
2015-04-05 20:04       ` Pavel Machek
2015-04-05 20:09       ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-05 20:09         ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-05 20:25         ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2015-04-05 20:25           ` Pavel Machek
2015-04-05 20:34           ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-05 20:34             ` Richard Weinberger
2015-04-09  8:34 ` Richard Weinberger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150405202559.GA3500@amd \
    --to=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.