From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143] helo=radon.swed.at) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1YVcSj-0006nE-7j for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:57:58 +0000 Message-ID: <5500037A.9010509@nod.at> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 09:57:30 +0100 From: Richard Weinberger MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dedekind1@gmail.com Subject: Re: RFC: detect and manage power cut on MLC NAND References: <54FEDC42.2060407@dave-tech.it> <1426058414.1567.2.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1426058414.1567.2.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Andrea Scian , mtd_mailinglist List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi! Am 11.03.2015 um 08:20 schrieb Artem Bityutskiy: > On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 13:51 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>> WDYT about this? >>> If it sounds reasonable is there any suggestion where to place such a code? >> >> Customers often use DYI uninterruptible power supplies using capacitors. >> But managing a power cut is the least problem you have with MLC NAND. > > Why is it the least problem, what is the hardest one? I thought this one > is the hardest. IMHO the hardest ones are the problems we don't know yet as NAND vendors are not really chatty about the MLC constraints. We don't know much about data retention for example. At least we have not much hard facts. Most of our knowledge is hearsay. What I wanted to say is that soldering a big capacitor onto your board will not make MLC NAND magically work perfectly fine. :-) Thanks, //richard