Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp6411658wrg; Thu, 8 Mar 2018 07:04:24 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtbRKx2xu0yOK36KzNc1lsWU66wGdyuJTQn62El9WS992pBQNXhC8RSYGU0FY0W1x2ja3ws X-Received: by 10.98.211.1 with SMTP id q1mr26760674pfg.199.1520521464730; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 07:04:24 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1520521464; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=JrVGBZwGowiQQTnjS2XaIPriniff0gXi+5Z1lNC1PAhiLo6SYz9W7iddGrPSdJxKIK yUxT2+gpBngEPuarXU4Ocv+C8Bu34GeNR8IHiYkdnEKhVUfMCTY82rrMKXjxu5B+YJUQ WzMEw+7p+Sifn6/oE9FcIpMqoPPArX1+67e6H4KHVFMcORFWwYbmxauoml9prcQ1AHRA bAn4IA5lmRkNVHyiCy1e8wfGq/Nuj7BOA3Kl/fUFRVD+XZIxvjf02IWfMC3CkSpc0IqV VsZhyRPdJkvwc4Sd0AwCp44VFG+QR3yO6+Rt04qdTNx9XU4tDAOEiIepm5zwt9Svus16 acHA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:reply-to:from:subject:message-id :arc-authentication-results; bh=3g17Ex0JfXZQHlin12dIuIEMAVVc4fZuX/and/TS874=; b=yxcEOeIayLG+IoG6pc4sBKqmwY7QGhEGh+1+aMWmOVL+aEW6W70wQDBNzTUFEsCt/Q C9NgAk1GAAT1ooHgFJ2PVcxwwa9kttkl69QEodZcaPpFUO/OEbU9fNTWHPEUGqIVIsBI A2GOkvT/Sc8b5qltBR3UoTx3DFxxTGmqYvW0Ul6b0Fqtav87RqHw7Hvdk0J0cLJ5fzj6 Xh5JfZK9vx474YhZ+dnYDnY147jhWhvqWckAnYlHh0/DUNL+7aattIOhWzJTZIfspi/Y StwoQb884ypiV+3kerSfxSWG9/vJhA+ToovOHtlBq9TEZAEzXbfc4qD5A+3F2DHW4KFl WejQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x9-v6si14981209plw.160.2018.03.08.07.03.45; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 07:04:24 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756011AbeCHPBY (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 8 Mar 2018 10:01:24 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:18914 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755468AbeCHPBV (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2018 10:01:21 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Mar 2018 07:01:20 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,441,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="26310555" Received: from linux.intel.com ([10.54.29.200]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Mar 2018 07:01:20 -0800 Received: from abityuts-desk.fi.intel.com (abityuts-desk.fi.intel.com [10.237.68.39]) by linux.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54235803D7; Thu, 8 Mar 2018 07:01:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1520521275.20980.41.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubi: Reject MLC NAND From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com To: Richard Weinberger , Linus Walleij Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Cyrille Pitchen , Mark Vasut , Boris BREZILLON , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , tharvey@gateworks.com, stable , Ulf Hansson Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 17:01:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <3797589.z8fAhu5iDP@blindfold> References: <20180303104554.5958-1-richard@nod.at> <3797589.z8fAhu5iDP@blindfold> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.5 (3.26.5-1.fc27) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 15:43 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > As stated by David Woodhouse, it was a huge mistake by UBI to not > reject MLC > NAND from the very beginning. Correction: when we were developing UBI/UBIFS and upstreamed them, MLC was widely used yet we did not really know about it. So there was nothing to reject yet. The mistake is that we did not add the reject timely. When people started reporting MLC issues we were answering that UBI/UBIFS stack needs more work to make MLC safe to use, and we hoped someone would do the work. Artem.