From: Angus CLARK <angus.clark@st.com>
To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
Kulikov Vasiliy <segooon@gmail.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>,
Peter Wippich <pewi@gw-instruments.de>,
Gabor Juhos <juhosg@openwrt.org>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@gmail.com>,
Jamie Iles <jamie@jamieiles.com>,
Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com>,
Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>,
David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>,
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>,
Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>,
Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>,
Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@gmail.com>,
Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net>,
Axel Lin <axel.lin@gmail.com>, Anatolij Gustschin <agust@denx.de>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Lei Wen <leiwen@marvell.com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@intel.com>,
Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Matthieu CASTET <matthieu.castet@parrot.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com>,
Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>,
Chuanxiao Dong <chuanxiao.dong@intel.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Guillaume LECERF <glecerf@gmail.com>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
Roman Tereshonkov <roman.tereshonkov@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] NAND BBM + BBT updates
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:19:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F155937.1040108@st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1326494218.2258.36.camel@koala>
On 01/13/2012 10:36 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 10:09 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>
>> so the OOB array is by design more reliable than the data area?
>
> I think so, because it is distributed, and it is historically the way
> blocks had been marked as bad, and I thing vendors make sure this
> mechanism works.
>
Is this really true? I was under the impression that the OOB area was the same
as the data area, as far as reliability is concerned, and is subject to the same
ECC requirements.
As far as I am aware, NAND manufacturers only guarantee that the
factory-programmed OOB BB markers are valid. Nothing is mentioned in the
datasheets about using OOB BB markers to track worn blocks - they all tend to
recommend BBTs.
Cheers,
Angus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-17 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-09 20:23 [PATCH v3 0/6] NAND BBM + BBT updates Brian Norris
2012-01-09 20:23 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] mtd: nand: add NAND_NO_WRITE_OOB option Brian Norris
2012-01-09 20:23 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] mtd: nand: write bad block marker by default even with BBT Brian Norris
2012-01-09 20:23 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] mtd: nand: erase block before marking bad Brian Norris
2012-01-13 22:42 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-01-13 23:07 ` Brian Norris
2012-01-09 20:23 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] mtd: nand: fix SCAN2NDPAGE check for BBM Brian Norris
2012-01-09 20:23 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] mtd: nand: differentiate 1- vs. 2-byte writes when marking bad blocks Brian Norris
2012-01-09 20:23 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] mtd: nand: correct comment on nand_chip badblockbits Brian Norris
2012-01-10 9:44 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] NAND BBM + BBT updates Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2012-01-10 18:54 ` Brian Norris
2012-01-11 22:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-01-12 7:58 ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-01-13 22:12 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-01-16 19:35 ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-01-12 9:09 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2012-01-13 22:36 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-01-16 20:59 ` Woodhouse, David
2012-01-17 8:23 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-01-17 8:27 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-01-17 11:19 ` Angus CLARK [this message]
2012-01-17 13:06 ` Ivan Djelic
2012-01-18 22:18 ` Brian Norris
2012-01-17 10:22 ` Angus CLARK
2012-01-17 13:33 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-01-18 22:04 ` Brian Norris
2012-01-19 9:30 ` Angus CLARK
2012-01-19 9:59 ` Ricard Wanderlof
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=4F155937.1040108@st.com \
--to=angus.clark@st.com \
--cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
--cc=David.Woodhouse@intel.com \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=agust@denx.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=artem.bityutskiy@intel.com \
--cc=axel.lin@gmail.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=cernekee@gmail.com \
--cc=chuanxiao.dong@intel.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dbaryshkov@gmail.com \
--cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=dilinger@queued.net \
--cc=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=florian@openwrt.org \
--cc=glecerf@gmail.com \
--cc=ivan.djelic@parrot.com \
--cc=jamie@jamieiles.com \
--cc=jim2101024@gmail.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=jonas.gorski@gmail.com \
--cc=juhosg@openwrt.org \
--cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
--cc=leiwen@marvell.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
--cc=matthieu.castet@parrot.com \
--cc=maximlevitsky@gmail.com \
--cc=nicolas.ferre@atmel.com \
--cc=pewi@gw-instruments.de \
--cc=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
--cc=roman.tereshonkov@nokia.com \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=segooon@gmail.com \
--cc=shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com \
--cc=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
/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.