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;
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To:     dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@wedev4u.fr>,
        Mark Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
        Boris BREZILLON <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>, tharvey@gateworks.com,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubi: Reject MLC NAND
Date:   Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:28:50 +0100
Message-ID: <10429741.dU3vzh71GH@blindfold>
In-Reply-To: <1520521275.20980.41.camel@gmail.com>
References: <20180303104554.5958-1-richard@nod.at> <3797589.z8fAhu5iDP@blindfold> <1520521275.20980.41.camel@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Artem,

Am Donnerstag, 8. M?rz 2018, 16:01:15 CET schrieb Artem Bityutskiy:
> 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.

You mean *not* widely used?
 
> 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.

True.
TBH Boris and I also thought that adding MLC support is not a that big deal...

Thanks,
//richard