From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.171] helo=mgw-ext12.nokia.com) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1HHGTu-0007lq-U4 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 04:31:32 -0500 Subject: Re: UBI bad block Management From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Brijesh Singh In-Reply-To: <6b5362aa0702140128h69cc8f11k48bec5b739640ded@mail.gmail.com> References: <6b5362aa0702140128h69cc8f11k48bec5b739640ded@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:31:10 +0200 Message-Id: <1171445470.8268.2.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 14:58 +0530, Brijesh Singh wrote: > The flash devices are getting of bigger in Size.The Init Scan time > will increase with bigger Size flash.How long are we going to rely on > MTD for Bad block Management. I hope forever. It is MTD's and only MTD's business to manage bad blocks. Do not want MTD to do scanning? - Use on-flash BBT. --=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)