From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.172] helo=mgw-ext13.nokia.com) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Gsams-0001QE-O9 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 03:08:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Eraseblocks torture: OneNAND results From: Artem Bityutskiy To: kyungmin.park@samsung.com In-Reply-To: <6640129.409201165563759259.JavaMail.weblogic@ep_ml20> References: <6640129.409201165563759259.JavaMail.weblogic@ep_ml20> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 10:08:48 +0200 Message-Id: <1165565328.20337.115.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: linux-mtd Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Kyungmin, On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 07:42 +0000, Kyungmin Park wrote: > Yes I already modified the source for my environment. and also add check = initial bad block. Ah, indeed, thanks. I will add bad block checking. Also, I am re-structuring the test now to make it baster and more torturous. I am going to do erase/write/operations with the whole group, not with each eraseblock separately. HW guys think it should cause more trouble for flash. I will notify you when to update. --=20 Best regards, Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E=D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9 =D0=90= =D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC)