Problem in erasing a nand flash with ubiformat

Problem in erasing a nand flash with ubiformat

[Canella Matteo]

Hi all,
I have a question for Artem,
I'm running a problem with ubiformat and I saw this email from you:

http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-January/024285.htm

I'm having the same problem, ubiformat fails to format a nand flash because it is not able to erase a block.
flash_eraseall just ignore this erase problem.

Do you think ubiformat should physically mark this block as bad eraseblock? Or should it just ignore it?

Why currently ubiformat or flash_eraseall does not mark these as bad blocks?

I'm going to implement this feature in your ubiformat app and I'd like to know if you have already done some work on it...
Thanks


  Matteo  Canella 
  ELECTRONIC DIVISION  -
   PROJECT ENGINEER

  MTA SpA
  Via Romagnoli 24
  41033 Concordia Sulla Secchia (MO) - Italy
  T. +39 0535 57732 
  F. +39 0535 54550 
  email: matteo.canella@mta.it

Re: Problem in erasing a nand flash with ubiformat

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 10:27 +0200, Canella Matteo wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have a question for Artem,
> I'm running a problem with ubiformat and I saw this email from you:
> 
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-January/024285.htm
> 
> I'm having the same problem, ubiformat fails to format a nand flash because it is not able to erase a block.
> flash_eraseall just ignore this erase problem.

Sorry, I am not sure what you mean. You say that ubiformat gets an
erase error and instead of marking the eraseblock as bad it exits?

Are you using the newest ubiformat version from the mtd-utils git
tree?

The latest ubiformat does have code which makrs a block as bad on
write and erase errors. See the 'mark_bad()' function. If this
does not work for you, could you please try to use gdb and figure
out why? The code currently tries to mark the eraseblock as bad
only in case of an EIO errors, may be this is the problem?

> Do you think ubiformat should physically mark this block as bad eraseblock? Or should it just ignore it?
Yes it should. And there is already code in ubiformat which implements
this.

> Why currently ubiformat or flash_eraseall does not mark these as bad blocks?

It does. Make sure you use the latest ubiformat. Not sure about
flash_eraseall, I do not use it nowadays.

-- 
Best regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)

RE: Problem in erasing a nand flash with ubiformat

[Canella Matteo]

-----Original Message-----
From: Artem Bityutskiy [mailto:dedekind@infradead.org] 
Sent: mercoledì 10 giugno 2009 10.36
To: Canella Matteo
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Problem in erasing a nand flash with ubiformat

> Are you using the newest ubiformat version from the mtd-utils git
> tree?
 
Ok, this is the problem.
I'm aligned to ea429635388f7bb53f62c41ec3d5ccf5fa207370 (Mon Jan 12 11:08:03 2009) commit.
I must get the latest version.

Thanks.

Regards,
Matteo  Canella 
  

RE: Problem in erasing a nand flash with ubiformat

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 12:01 +0200, Canella Matteo wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Artem Bityutskiy [mailto:dedekind@infradead.org] 
> Sent: mercoledì 10 giugno 2009 10.36
> To: Canella Matteo
> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: Problem in erasing a nand flash with ubiformat
> 
> > Are you using the newest ubiformat version from the mtd-utils git
> > tree?
>  
> Ok, this is the problem.
> I'm aligned to ea429635388f7bb53f62c41ec3d5ccf5fa207370 (Mon Jan 12 11:08:03 2009) commit.
> I must get the latest version.

Yes, this is ancient code base. Update please. Also, make sure
you use the latest UBIFS. UBIFS is young, and we still fix bugs,
so always update it. We maintain back-port trees for peoples'
convenience:
http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/doc/ubifs.html#L_source

-- 
Best regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)