Re: nanddump badblock options

Artem Bityutskiy
2011-06-09T08:31:07Z

Hi,

On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 13:01 -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> I have some ideas to implement in nanddump regarding the variety of bad block
> handling options. I thought I'd at least get some feedback before working up a
> full patch, so please comment on my ideas.
>
> (1) The comments in nandwrite say that nandwrite is an "inverse operation" to
> nanddump. However, take, for example, the following command:
>
> nandwrite --length=131072 /dev/mtd1 myfile
>
> Then, if we consider that there may be bad blocks at the beginning of the
> device, nandwrite may skip to the second block in order to write this data.
> Now, the default behavior of nanddump does not at all fit the "inverse" of this
> very simple nandwrite operation. While you might expect the following to be an
> inverse:
>
> nanddump --length=131072 /dev/mtd1 --file=myfile.dump
>
> you in fact will not get the same data that you wrote from the original file.
> Instead, you will get all 0xFF since by default nanddump substitutes 0xFF for
> all the data of the bad block. I call this (unwanted) behavior `padding'.
>
> Thus, in short, I'm recommending that nanddump default to using --skipbad as
> a default option, with a new `padbad' option to cover the original behavior.
> Perhaps the "default" nanddump should have a warning over a period of time,
> before changing the default operation? See (3), Deprecation schedule.

Sounds good to me.

> (2) There are now (with my addition of `skipbad', and the current default
> `padbad') four methods used for handling bad blocks we come across when dumping
> flash data. I think they'd be cleaner if they were all grouped under a single
> option that would work something like:
>
> --bb=METHOD
>
> where METHOD could be `padbad', `dumpbad', `skipbad', and `omitbad'. Notice the
> renaming of --noskipbad to --bb=dumpbad, since --noskipbad seems like an
> inverse to --skipbad, which it is not. See (5), Summary table.
>
> I think eventually, we would just drop both the short and long options for the
> --omitbad, --noskipbad, and --skipbad options.
>
> (3) Deprecation schedule:
>
> Assuming the above is agreeable to everyone, how soon can we:
> * drop the --noskipbad, --skipbad, --omitbad (pluse -b, -k, -N) flags in
> favor of --bb=METHOD?
> * change the default behavior from `padbad' to `skipbad'?

As soon as you implement this stuff and we push it, then one release
with warnings, next release we can remove that stuff. We already have
many changes, but I can wait for yours, then we release mtd-1.4.5, and
then we can kill the options next day.

> I was thinkig the old methods (--omitbad, --noskipbad, --skipbad) should remain
> for the time being, with a warning to tell of their deprecation/removal in next
> release.
>
> Additionally, we could perhaps include a warning when nanddump is called
> without an explicit BB handling option, alerting users that the default will be
> changing to --bb=skipbad in the next release.

Yes.

> (4) Can Mike provide a good explanation for --bb=omitbad in the table below? I
> personally don't understand it's exact use, nor do I know how to describe it
> best (to provide contrast against the other options), but I understand that you
> would like to keep the option. I would appreciate some help.
>
> (5) Summary table:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Old option New option Comment
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> <default> => --bb=padbad dump flash data, substituting 0xFF for any bad blocks
> --noskipbad => --bb=dumpbad dump flash data, including any bad blocks
> --skipbad => --bb=skipbad, <default> dump good data, completely skipping any bad blocks (new default)
> --omitbad => --bb=omitbad (dump flash data, substituting nothing for any bad blocks?)

Hmm...

--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)