Re: [PATCH 0/5] ubi: Fix bad PEBs reserve caclulation

Shmulik Ladkani
2012-07-31T08:19:36Z

Hi Artem,

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 16:56:50 +0300 Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Shmulik, I've separated out the defconfig changes and pushed patches
> 1,2, and 3 to the UBI tree (the master branch). Patches 4 and 5 are
> already merged upstream. I did a couple of minor modifications in
> commentaries and messages and I think in variables declaration section,
> nothing else. I'll send you the patches separately.

Thanks!

I've noticed a diff in the Kconfig describing MTD_UBI_BEB_LIMIT.

In my original [PATCH 2/5] "ubi: Limit amount of reserved eraseblocks
for bad PEB handling" I've amended the MTD_UBI_BEB_LIMIT explanation a
bit.

The diff between what's on linux-ubi and my suggested description is:

- This option specifies the maximum bad physical eraseblocks UBI
- expects on the UBI device (percents of total number of physical
- eraseblocks on this MTD partition). If the underlying flash does not
- admit of bad eraseblocks (e.g. NOR flash), this value is ignored.
+ If the MTD device admits of bad eraseblocks (e.g. NAND flash), UBI
+ reserves some amount of physical eraseblocks to handle new bad
+ eraseblocks.
+ This option specifies the maximum bad eraseblocks UBI expects on the
+ ubi device (percents of total number of flash eraseblocks).
+ This limit is used in order to derive amount of eraseblock UBI
+ reserves for handling new bad blocks.
+ If the device has more bad eraseblocks than this limit, UBI does not
+ reserve any physical eraseblocks for new bad eraseblocks, but
+ attempts to use available eraseblocks (if any).
+ If the underlying flash does not admit of bad eraseblocks (e.g. NOR
+ flash), this value is ignored.

Just wanted to make sure you deliberately discarded these amendments.

Regards,
Shmulik