From: Dominique Martinet <dominique.martinet@atmark-techno.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
chengzhihao1 <chengzhihao1@huawei.com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Cheng Ming Lin <chengminglin@mxic.com.tw>,
Liyuan Pang <pangliyuan1@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Backport fixes for UBI
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 09:57:27 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aoZQ90HBGlM-SL8K@atmark-techno.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1200997805.161072.1787136508436.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Richard Weinberger wrote on Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 12:48:28PM +0200:
> While porting these back is not wrong, I have a hard time to see how the
> current stables rules apply here.
Thank you for looking into this!
I'm honestly fuzzy on stable backport "rules", but in practice I see all
sort of things get in (admitely sometimes new features/refactor just
because it makes an actual fix easier to backport, but also quite a few
leaks on failures like the second patch and other general improvements),
so after noticing someone else submitted 6.12 contiguous read
improvements recently[1] so I assumed such backports would be welcome...
But ultimately I think it's up to you, so happy to see the patches
dropped if you prefer.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260811161342.533280-1-frieder@fris.de
> "mtd: ubi: skip programming unused bits in ubi headers" does not fix anything.
> It's a pure optimization for future flashes, UBI worked since ever without this
> change.
I might have misunderstood something about this patch, but while UBI
works fine I believe this would increase the longevity of more than just
"future flashes"
I've burned out 2 times 1MB (4 erase blocks) from the NAND I have on
hand (winbond W25N04LW) using either random data + erase (nandtest) or a
patched version writing zeroes + erase, and writing many zeroes failed
the erase blocks about 40-50% faster (85 thousands cycles vs 132
thousands until the first erase failure, 121/175 until erase stopped
working with many retries)
This obviously is a tiny sample size and not concrete proof, and this
patch won't have such a big impact because the area is small, but I
believe this patch will still improve the endurance a tiny bit for at
least our model, which was the motivation for me to pick this up.
Of course, there's also a chance that something breaks from it so I
can perfectly understand if you prefer not to backport it; you're in a
much better place than me to draw the line.
Thanks,
--
Dominique Martinet | Asmadeus
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-20 0:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-18 2:09 [PATCH 0/2] Backport fixes for UBI Dominique Martinet
2026-08-18 2:09 ` [PATCH v6.12.y 1/2] mtd: ubi: skip programming unused bits in ubi headers Dominique Martinet
2026-08-18 4:46 ` Zhihao Cheng
2026-08-18 2:09 ` [PATCH v6.12.y 2/2] ubi: fastmap: fix ubi->fm memory leak Dominique Martinet
2026-08-18 4:47 ` Zhihao Cheng
2026-08-19 3:32 ` [PATCH 0/2] Backport fixes for UBI Sasha Levin
2026-08-19 10:48 ` Richard Weinberger
2026-08-20 0:57 ` Dominique Martinet [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aoZQ90HBGlM-SL8K@atmark-techno.com \
--to=dominique.martinet@atmark-techno.com \
--cc=chengminglin@mxic.com.tw \
--cc=chengzhihao1@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=pangliyuan1@huawei.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox