[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EEA2F38.2090807@freescale.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:32:40 -0600
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
To: Li Yang <leoli@...escale.com>
CC: <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>, <dedekind1@...il.com>,
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, LiuShuo <b35362@...escale.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <shuo.liu@...escale.com>,
<linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mtd/nand : workaround for Freescale FCM to support
large-page Nand chip
On 12/14/2011 10:59 PM, Li Yang wrote:
> The limitation of the proposed bad block marker migration is that you
> need to make sure the migration is done and only done once. If it is
> done more than once, the factory bad block marker is totally messed
> up. It requires a complex mechanism to automatically guarantee the
> migration is only done once, and it still won't be 100% safe.
>
> I would suggest we use a much easier compromise that we form the BBT
> base on the factory bad block marker on first use of the flash, and
> after that the factory bad block marker is dropped. We just relies on
> the BBT for information about bad blocks. Although by doing so we
> can't regenerate the BBT again, as there is mirror for the BBT I
> don't think we have too much risk.
I have corrupted the BBT too often during development (e.g. a bug makes
all accesses fail, so the upper layers decide to mark everything bad) to
be comfortable with this.
Elsewhere in the thread I suggested a way to let the marker be in either
the bbt or in a dedicated block, depending on whether it's a development
situation where the BBT needs to be erasable.
-Scott
--
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