Real bad blocks of nand flash?

Real bad blocks of nand flash?

[jeanwelly]

I am running 2.6.11. 7 on S3C2410 ARM platform, using nand flash
K9F1208, root fs =yaffs....

Why occured so many bad blocks of nand. Are these blocks real bad? How
can I take a test in another way?


#./eraseall /dev/mtd/3 
................. 
Erasing 16 KibytMTD_ioctl 
e @ 230000 -- 72MTD_ioctl 
EraMTD_ioctl 
sing 16 Kibyte @MTD_ioctl 
234000 -- 73 % MTD_ioctl 
ErasinMTD_ioctl 
g 16 Kibyte @ 23MTD_ioctl 
8000 -- 73 % comMTD_ioctl 
Erasing 1MTD_ioctl 
6 Kibyte @ 23c000 -- 74 % compleMTD_close 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 278000 -- 82 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 27c000 -- 82 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 280000 -- 83 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 284000 -- 83 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 288000 -- 84 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 28c000 -- 84 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 290000 -- 85 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 2ac000 -- 89 % complete. 
./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error 
Erased 3072 Kibyte @ 0 -- 100% complete. 
# 

The following is my booting info:

S3C2410 NAND Driver, (c) 2004 Simtec Electronics 
s3c2410-nand: mapped registers at c4a00000 
s3c2410-nand: timing: Tacls 10ns, Twrph0 40ns, Twrph1 10ns 
NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xec, Chip ID: 0x76 (Samsung NAND 64MiB
3,3V 8-bit)
NAND_ECC_NONE selected by board driver. This is not recommended !! 
Scanning device for bad blocks 
Bad eraseblock 129 at 0x00204000   <--- REAL BAD BLOCK ????
Bad eraseblock 130 at 0x00208000 
Bad eraseblock 146 at 0x00248000 
Bad eraseblock 147 at 0x0024c000 
Bad eraseblock 148 at 0x00250000 
Bad eraseblock 149 at 0x00254000 
Bad eraseblock 158 at 0x00278000 
Bad eraseblock 161 at 0x00284000 
Bad eraseblock 174 at 0x002b8000 
Bad eraseblock 178 at 0x002c8000 
Bad eraseblock 286 at 0x00478000 
Bad eraseblock 287 at 0x0047c000 
Bad eraseblock 288 at 0x00480000 
Bad eraseblock 289 at 0x00484000 
Bad eraseblock 290 at 0x00488000 
Bad eraseblock 291 at 0x0048c000 
Bad eraseblock 292 at 0x00490000 
Bad eraseblock 294 at 0x00498000 
Bad eraseblock 295 at 0x0049c000 
Bad eraseblock 296 at 0x004a0000 
Bad eraseblock 297 at 0x004a4000 
Bad eraseblock 298 at 0x004a8000 
Bad eraseblock 299 at 0x004ac000 
Bad eraseblock 300 at 0x004b0000 
Bad eraseblock 301 at 0x004b4000 
Bad eraseblock 305 at 0x004c4000 
Creating 5 MTD partitions on "NAND 64MiB 3,3V 8-bit": 
0x00000000-0x00020000 : "vivi" 
mtd: Giving out device 0 to vivi 
0x00020000-0x00030000 : "param" 
mtd: Giving out device 1 to param 
0x00030000-0x00200000 : "kernel" 
mtd: Giving out device 2 to kernel 
0x00200000-0x00600000 : "root" 
mtd: Giving out device 3 to root 
0x00600000-0x04000000 : "usr" 
mtd: Giving out device 4 to usr 
mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice 
NET: Registered protocol family 2 
IP: routing cache hash table of 512 buckets, 4Kbytes 
TCP established hash table entries: 4096 (order: 3, 32768 bytes) 
TCP bind hash table entries: 4096 (order: 2, 16384 bytes) 
TCP: Hash tables configured (established 4096 bind 4096) 
NET: Registered protocol family 1 
Root-NFS: No NFS server available, giving up. 
VFS: Unable to mount root fs via NFS, trying floppy. 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
yaffs: dev is 32505859 name is "(unavailable)" 
VFS: Mounted root (yaffs filesystem). 
Mounted devfs on /dev 
Freeing init memory: 80K 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
zw: mount /etc as ramfs 
zw: /bin/mount -t yaffs /dev/mtdblock/4 /usr 
yaffs: dev is 32505860 name is "(unavailable)" 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
exec /sbin/init 
console=/dev/console 
init started: BusyBox v0.60.3 (2002.05.13-08:36+0000) multi-call binary 
Starting pid 20, console /dev/console: '/etc/init.d/rcS' 
mount: Mounting tmpfs on /dev/shm failed: No such file or directory 
Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 UTC 2004 
mount: Mounting ramfs on /.kde failed: No such file or directory 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
calibrate: error while loading shared libraries: liblinuetteapp.so.1:
cannot load shayserver: error while loading shared libraries:
liblinuettemodule.so.1: cannot load shayWaiting for enter to start
'/bin/sh' (pid 38, terminal /dev/console)

Please press Enter to activate this console. 
Starting pid 38, console /dev/console: '/bin/sh' 


BusyBox v0.60.3 (2002.05.13-08:36+0000) Built-in shell (ash) 
Enter 'help' for a list of built-in commands. 

# ls 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
aa.c etc linuxrc proc tmp 
bin lib lost+found qt usr 
dev linuette mnt sbin var 
# ls /usr 
Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended 
bin lib lost+found sample 
etc linuette qt sbin 

BTW: 
In bootloader vivi, I use  # bon part , there are no bad blocks found. WHY?


-- 
jeanwelly
Email:  jeanwelly@gmail.com
China

Re: [Yaffs] Real bad blocks of nand flash?

[Charles Manning]

You can expect up to approx 1% of bad blocks. These will often be close 
together.


 On Tuesday 17 May 2005 14:46, jeanwelly wrote:
> I am running 2.6.11. 7 on S3C2410 ARM platform, using nand flash
> K9F1208, root fs =yaffs....
>
> Why occured so many bad blocks of nand. Are these blocks real bad? How
> can I take a test in another way?
>
>
> #./eraseall /dev/mtd/3
> .................
> Erasing 16 KibytMTD_ioctl
> e @ 230000 -- 72MTD_ioctl
> EraMTD_ioctl
> sing 16 Kibyte @MTD_ioctl
> 234000 -- 73 % MTD_ioctl
> ErasinMTD_ioctl
> g 16 Kibyte @ 23MTD_ioctl
> 8000 -- 73 % comMTD_ioctl
> Erasing 1MTD_ioctl
> 6 Kibyte @ 23c000 -- 74 % compleMTD_close
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 278000 -- 82 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 27c000 -- 82 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 280000 -- 83 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 284000 -- 83 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 288000 -- 84 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 28c000 -- 84 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 290000 -- 85 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erasing 16 Kibyte @ 2ac000 -- 89 % complete.
> ./eraseall: /dev/mtd/3: MTD Erase failure: Input/output error
> Erased 3072 Kibyte @ 0 -- 100% complete.
> #
>
> The following is my booting info:
>
> S3C2410 NAND Driver, (c) 2004 Simtec Electronics
> s3c2410-nand: mapped registers at c4a00000
> s3c2410-nand: timing: Tacls 10ns, Twrph0 40ns, Twrph1 10ns
> NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xec, Chip ID: 0x76 (Samsung NAND 64MiB
> 3,3V 8-bit)
> NAND_ECC_NONE selected by board driver. This is not recommended !!
> Scanning device for bad blocks
> Bad eraseblock 129 at 0x00204000   <--- REAL BAD BLOCK ????
> Bad eraseblock 130 at 0x00208000
> Bad eraseblock 146 at 0x00248000
> Bad eraseblock 147 at 0x0024c000
> Bad eraseblock 148 at 0x00250000
> Bad eraseblock 149 at 0x00254000
> Bad eraseblock 158 at 0x00278000
> Bad eraseblock 161 at 0x00284000
> Bad eraseblock 174 at 0x002b8000
> Bad eraseblock 178 at 0x002c8000
> Bad eraseblock 286 at 0x00478000
> Bad eraseblock 287 at 0x0047c000
> Bad eraseblock 288 at 0x00480000
> Bad eraseblock 289 at 0x00484000
> Bad eraseblock 290 at 0x00488000
> Bad eraseblock 291 at 0x0048c000
> Bad eraseblock 292 at 0x00490000
> Bad eraseblock 294 at 0x00498000
> Bad eraseblock 295 at 0x0049c000
> Bad eraseblock 296 at 0x004a0000
> Bad eraseblock 297 at 0x004a4000
> Bad eraseblock 298 at 0x004a8000
> Bad eraseblock 299 at 0x004ac000
> Bad eraseblock 300 at 0x004b0000
> Bad eraseblock 301 at 0x004b4000
> Bad eraseblock 305 at 0x004c4000
> Creating 5 MTD partitions on "NAND 64MiB 3,3V 8-bit":
> 0x00000000-0x00020000 : "vivi"
> mtd: Giving out device 0 to vivi
> 0x00020000-0x00030000 : "param"
> mtd: Giving out device 1 to param
> 0x00030000-0x00200000 : "kernel"
> mtd: Giving out device 2 to kernel
> 0x00200000-0x00600000 : "root"
> mtd: Giving out device 3 to root
> 0x00600000-0x04000000 : "usr"
> mtd: Giving out device 4 to usr
> mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
> NET: Registered protocol family 2
> IP: routing cache hash table of 512 buckets, 4Kbytes
> TCP established hash table entries: 4096 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
> TCP bind hash table entries: 4096 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
> TCP: Hash tables configured (established 4096 bind 4096)
> NET: Registered protocol family 1
> Root-NFS: No NFS server available, giving up.
> VFS: Unable to mount root fs via NFS, trying floppy.
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> yaffs: dev is 32505859 name is "(unavailable)"
> VFS: Mounted root (yaffs filesystem).
> Mounted devfs on /dev
> Freeing init memory: 80K
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> zw: mount /etc as ramfs
> zw: /bin/mount -t yaffs /dev/mtdblock/4 /usr
> yaffs: dev is 32505860 name is "(unavailable)"
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> exec /sbin/init
> console=/dev/console
> init started: BusyBox v0.60.3 (2002.05.13-08:36+0000) multi-call binary
> Starting pid 20, console /dev/console: '/etc/init.d/rcS'
> mount: Mounting tmpfs on /dev/shm failed: No such file or directory
> Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 UTC 2004
> mount: Mounting ramfs on /.kde failed: No such file or directory
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> calibrate: error while loading shared libraries: liblinuetteapp.so.1:
> cannot load shayserver: error while loading shared libraries:
> liblinuettemodule.so.1: cannot load shayWaiting for enter to start
> '/bin/sh' (pid 38, terminal /dev/console)
>
> Please press Enter to activate this console.
> Starting pid 38, console /dev/console: '/bin/sh'
>
>
> BusyBox v0.60.3 (2002.05.13-08:36+0000) Built-in shell (ash)
> Enter 'help' for a list of built-in commands.
>
> # ls
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> aa.c etc linuxrc proc tmp
> bin lib lost+found qt usr
> dev linuette mnt sbin var
> # ls /usr
> Reading data from NAND FLASH without ECC is not recommended
> bin lib lost+found sample
> etc linuette qt sbin
>
> BTW:
> In bootloader vivi, I use  # bon part , there are no bad blocks found. WHY?

Re: Real bad blocks of nand flash?

[Jarkko Lavinen]

On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 10:46:52AM +0800, ext jeanwelly wrote:
> Why occured so many bad blocks of nand. Are these blocks real bad? How
> can I take a test in another way?

I have seen few test boards with JFFS2 partitions and more bad blcoks
than there should be.  More than the manyfactures suggests the should
be at maximum.

When investigating one board I found something had been write garbage
to OOB. I found for example word "driv" at the end of one OOB and "er"
at the beginning of next. It looked just as if somebody had written
kernel memory at random point to flash. This is not reproducinle but
now I have garbage check in nand_base.c:write_oob() to hopefully catch
this if it ever repeats.

With one boatd with with lots of presumably incorrectly marked bad
blocks board I broke the rules and simply disabled the bad block check
from nand_base.c and from flash_eraseall.c. I ran flash_eraseall and
the flash erased nicely except for few, obviously real bad blocks
which refused ot be erased. I wouldn't recommed the procedure because
one end up with no bad blocks at all but in my case it worked nice and
test board has performed flawlessly since then.

I think we would need a simple test program that would be similar to
badblocks program, writing patterns of 0x00, 0x55, 0xAA etc. to flash
and trying to find if some block fails when erasing, writing or in
verify read.

Jarkko Lavinen