From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [82.179.117.26] (helo=shelob.oktetlabs.ru) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.62 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1G7TwX-0007qP-E2 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 05:20:17 -0400 Message-ID: <44CDCB1F.3050005@yandex.ru> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:19:27 +0400 From: "Artem B. Bityutskiy" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marteo Tim Subject: Re: about using UBI on MLC Nand flash References: <91b24a870607272033n1fa43a45vb523982186708f8e@mail.gmail.com> <44C9BA59.7030006@yandex.ru> <91b24a870607310205w7fa0d847wb652da7a1b0c52c7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <91b24a870607310205w7fa0d847wb652da7a1b0c52c7@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Marteo Tim wrote: > OK, I'm glad to send it to you, include SAMSUNG&TOSHIBA's MLC NAND > flash datasheet, please check your email, :) Thanks! > Due to cheap price, MLC NAND flash maybe use more and more popular, > especially in bulky flash. Yaffs2 can already support MLC chips by > zero page rewrites, and I want UBI can support it too. :) Well, UBI works in this case as well. But it anyway needs 2 write operations. So, in your case, we'll spend 4K for UBI headers in each eraseblock... It's wastful, agree, but may be appropriate in some applications. -- Best Regards, Artem B. Bityutskiy, St.-Petersburg, Russia.