From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pb0-f49.google.com ([209.85.160.49]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Sjdxn-0004wn-Ix for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:10:24 +0000 Received: by pbbrq13 with SMTP id rq13so706183pbb.36 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:10:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FEA3349.3090701@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:10:17 -0700 From: Tomer Barletz MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Norris Subject: Re: mtd nand erase and bad block 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> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Angus CLARK , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, Shmulik Ladkani List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 06/14/2012 10:48 AM, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: >> On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 17:54 +0300, Shmulik Ladkani wrote: >>> >>> My personal preference would be: >>> 1. A new ioctl (MEMSCRUB?) >>> 2. debugfs flag, PER MTD PART (slightly safer than your global flag) >>> 3. global debugfs flag >>> >> Yes, I guess option 1 is the best I think. Option 2 needs too much work. > > Just to put my 2 cents in and revive this thread: I'm also interested > in this kind of feature. I personally recompile to disable bad block > tables temporarily whenever I need to reset a flash-based BBT or > unmark a "bad block." But this isn't always so easy for others I deal > with, so I'm all for a feature that can be used by a > relatively-inexperienced user to reset bad block tables, erase bad > block markers, etc. > > I like the idea of an ioctl (option 1), since that does not require > recompilation (even in the event that debugfs wasn't enabled) and can > be built into a user-space tool, with appropriate warnings and > prompting for the user, of course. The debugfs ideas seem a little bit > too manual to be useful for anyone but a true driver/kernel developer > and also a little bit too unsafe (a user may want to target a specific > block without disabling bad block checking for all chips or even for > the entire partition). > > FWIW, a similar topic was brought up a long time back, with little result: > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2010-October/032577.html > > So Angus, are you going to code this? > Isn't Jon's patch match option number 1? --Tomer