From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [202.202.0.36] (helo=cqu.edu.cn) by bombadil.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1KO7vD-0005sT-8V for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:24:40 +0000 Message-ID: <417409411.06132@cqu.edu.cn> Subject: Re: Deep thinking about the Wear-leveling mothed From: xiaochuan-xu To: dedekind@infradead.org In-Reply-To: <1217398973.9048.7.camel@sauron> References: <1217327479.2812.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1217398973.9048.7.camel@sauron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:24:02 +0800 Message-Id: <1217409842.2786.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: linux-mtd List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 09:22 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > Also, I am not sure it is save to erase one eraseblock several million > times and do not erase neighbor eraseblocks. There are "radiation" > effects in some flashes, when unused eraseblocks slowly "rot" when > their > neighbor eraseblocks are used a lot. I'm sorry but I'm not understand this clearly. -- yours Sincerely, xiaochuan-xu (许小川)