From: Martin Kurbanov <mmkurbanov@sberdevices.ru>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
<kernel@sberdevices.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: spinand: micron: fixing the offset for OOB
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:35:46 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ccf3099f-0e10-a87c-be83-4a414f01dca7@sberdevices.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230823133956.0a505a20@xps-13>
On 23.08.2023 14:39, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> mmkurbanov@sberdevices.ru wrote on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 14:33:57 +0300:
>
>> Hi Miquel,
>>
>> On 23.08.2023 11:41, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> I don't think the four bytes have any "bad block specific" meaning. In
>>> practice, the datasheet states:
>>>
>>> Value programmed for bad block at the first byte of spare
>>> area: 00h
>>>
>>> So only the first byte is used to mark the block bad, the rest is
>>> probably marked "reserved" for simplicity. I believe we should keep the
>>> current layout because it would otherwise break users for no real
>>> reason.
>>
>> I agree with you that this can break the work of users who use OOB.
>> However, I believe it would be more appropriate to use an offset of 4,
>> as the micron chip can use all 4 bytes for additional data about the
>> bad block. So, there is a non-zero probability of losing OOB data in
>> the reserved area (2 bytes) when the hardware chip attempts to mark
>> the block as bad.
>
> Is this really a process the chip can do? Aren't bad blocks factory
> marked only?
Actually, there is my understanding, I’m not sure exactly.
--
Best Regards,
Martin Kurbanov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-24 9:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-22 12:25 [PATCH v2 0/2] mtd: spinand: micron: correct parameters Martin Kurbanov
2023-08-22 12:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mtd: spinand: micron: correct bitmask for ecc status Martin Kurbanov
2023-08-22 12:30 ` Frieder Schrempf
2023-08-22 12:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: spinand: micron: fixing the offset for OOB Martin Kurbanov
2023-08-22 12:32 ` Frieder Schrempf
2023-08-22 13:35 ` Miquel Raynal
2023-08-22 16:57 ` Martin Kurbanov
2023-08-23 8:41 ` Miquel Raynal
2023-08-23 11:33 ` Martin Kurbanov
2023-08-23 11:39 ` Miquel Raynal
2023-08-24 9:35 ` Martin Kurbanov [this message]
2023-09-04 14:20 ` Martin Kurbanov
2023-09-04 14:31 ` Miquel Raynal
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=ccf3099f-0e10-a87c-be83-4a414f01dca7@sberdevices.ru \
--to=mmkurbanov@sberdevices.ru \
--cc=kernel@sberdevices.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®