linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] ubi: Fix bad PEBs reserve caclulation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120731111922.2cfbcc7a@pixies.home.jungo.com>
Date:	Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:19:22 +0300
From:	Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>
To:	dedekind1@...il.com
Cc:	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] ubi: Fix bad PEBs reserve caclulation

Hi Artem,

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 16:56:50 +0300 Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Shmulik, I've separated out the defconfig changes and pushed patches
> 1,2, and 3 to the UBI tree (the master branch). Patches 4 and 5 are
> already merged upstream. I did a couple of minor modifications in
> commentaries and messages and I think in variables declaration section,
> nothing else. I'll send you the patches separately.

Thanks!

I've noticed a diff in the Kconfig describing MTD_UBI_BEB_LIMIT.

In my original [PATCH 2/5] "ubi: Limit amount of reserved eraseblocks
for bad PEB handling" I've amended the MTD_UBI_BEB_LIMIT explanation a
bit.

The diff between what's on linux-ubi and my suggested description is:

-	  This option specifies the maximum bad physical eraseblocks UBI
-	  expects on the UBI device (percents of total number of physical
-	  eraseblocks on this MTD partition). If the underlying flash does not
-	  admit of bad eraseblocks (e.g. NOR flash), this value is ignored.
+	  If the MTD device admits of bad eraseblocks (e.g. NAND flash), UBI
+	  reserves some amount of physical eraseblocks to handle new bad
+	  eraseblocks.
+	  This option specifies the maximum bad eraseblocks UBI expects on the
+	  ubi device (percents of total number of flash eraseblocks).
+	  This limit is used in order to derive amount of eraseblock UBI
+	  reserves for handling new bad blocks.
+	  If the device has more bad eraseblocks than this limit, UBI does not
+	  reserve any physical eraseblocks for new bad eraseblocks, but
+	  attempts to use available eraseblocks (if any).
+	  If the underlying flash does not admit of bad eraseblocks (e.g. NOR
+	  flash), this value is ignored.

Just wanted to make sure you deliberately discarded these amendments.

Regards,
Shmulik
--
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/