From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-bk0-f49.google.com ([209.85.214.49]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1SqmVV-0004eV-M9 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 14:42:42 +0000 Received: by bkcji2 with SMTP id ji2so4554544bkc.36 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 07:42:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1342449432.7270.4.camel@brekeke> Subject: Re: mtd nand erase and bad block From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Angus CLARK Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:37:12 +0300 In-Reply-To: <4FF30A22.8040500@st.com> References: <4FC76039.6020701@sirius-es.it> <4FC771EC.4090500@intel.com> <4FC78012.5010704@sirius-es.it> <4FC8601C.5070708@intel.com> <4FC87D62.6020402@st.com> <1338540121.2536.150.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> <20120601140445.346e322e@halley> <4FC8CBA7.6000702@st.com> <20120601175407.7c39a8fb@halley> <1338898670.2507.48.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> <4FDEF60A.7010607@st.com> <1340790846.29342.19.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> <4FEAFE73.2040303@st.com> <1340965897.3070.144.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> <4FF14A5E.2060301@st.com> <1341318170.2979.61.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> <4FF30A22.8040500@st.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-0U264Ngbhs03VJPRI+8d" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, Shmulik Ladkani Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --=-0U264Ngbhs03VJPRI+8d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 16:05 +0100, Angus CLARK wrote: > So, are you suggesting that I implement a MEMBBSCRUB ioctl, with a flag t= o > indicate whether or not the BBTs should be updated (and some extra paddin= g for > future-proofing)? Might have think about what happens when called on blo= cks > reserved for the BBTs... First of all, implement only what you really need and can test. Do not try to implement too much of stuff you do not really need. Yes, the above sounds good. And the BBT eraseblocks are not (and should not) be directly accessible for erasure/scrubbing. --=20 Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy --=-0U264Ngbhs03VJPRI+8d Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJQBCcYAAoJECmIfjd9wqK0640P/iJk6l5q1EGPSPEF1wW1Ski+ h9nyrbEi1L9WkicXSWfulwFdRvBZxSsBeCe+vQy9kXx6QUCjpmZYu6iOWP2OrR1I wpIui/6P/ICDSrfOLLk7w085SHP1bSCGgKVMA6kyWW8ULgg/K/KYFz+ovJ8yDVif QUl5AhAG9qZrhuIg+4iYaqSHZyNcge+3woHV+PT4YrlBFMgNGEYjn3qXze8wrYIA 2YoTLsVQ0Eb040uYIUksuynYiifOCGk30YlMZlnxdTZ8TWv/yUnXWqzizl0pbv8n nRzDfKp51mK9MJe1fRzINwbDfD65M+X7bYGIrHD7Dz3WZSZynKQUi2E7uyLuP4xp ED+WDRQs25vFST2NlNJAjKMGgBXX8WFyvp1TrBNBTdLroleRAF19zPQTB+rprzu+ TvETN2o2P7us8Abb63f8Id+yHz0O6kc/gS9aHESd71Vq7jHpl/3a1z5BjiDM+ElR bo7+n8USSsL75v++6A3WsPij+Zw/guNYo/tkCEc2pKXkhB6nl/7+yAm1JY1YShQH JUdMM4PVtv3/m40QMxVTbC4KqUpKBEfmQ2p/QQoZ/JFsMwveltjCD/wP2WIAjDpi DbzXAZ3jqHy3+ld6G1zuVR05BNkrXLEfXt7klG+PXb/KZ0IG1o/elfjgeqH48CTu /Z37SasobdFUVemJn0LF =kW9n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-0U264Ngbhs03VJPRI+8d--