[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ehxchta0.fsf@free.fr>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 17:38:31 +0100
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
To: dedekind1@...il.com, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Mike Dunn <mikedunn@...sguy.com>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@...rot.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/16] mtd/docg3: add OOB layout to mtdinfo
Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com> writes:
> What Robert says is that we probably need an is_page_blank() and let the
> driver implement it optimally, or make MTD fall-back to 0xFFs
> comparison.
>
> This is my understanding.
And that's exactly my point.
And while we're discussing MTD API, I'd like to add another thing I was thinking
of, from a conversation Mike and Ivan had.
They discussed how UBIFS is "intolerant" to bitflips, and marks a block as
"unusable" if one bitflip occured, even if the ECC can fix much more.
What I was thinking is that the MTD oob information which exposes how many ECC
are available should expose as well how many bitflips can be fixed (for example
4 bitflips can be fixed, 5 bitflips can be detected). Then, the read_oob()
function could return back 0 if read was successful, -Exxxx on error, or a
positive number N if N bitflips were fixed.
With this information, upper level could decide from (read_oob() return and
ecc.fixable_bitflips) if a block should be marked as unusable (worn out) or not.
I'd like some feedback on this idea as well.
Cheers.
--
Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists