| Message ID | 4A2D77EE.2090400@orb.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | bc0cd0d9606c7d0c41d09a694b49bade159815b1 |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 13:43 -0700, Jehan Bing wrote: > Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > > Yes, write and erase failure mean that the erasblock is bad. But I think > > marking a block as bad straight away is just dangerous. Who knows may be > > this is a small glitch in a bus, or a software bug, or some-one > > corrupted driver's memory, or whatever. This is why UBI is doing > > eraseblock torturing before marking it as bad. And it is very careful > > about error codes - only EIO code is considered as a reason to mark an > > eraseblock as bad. > > > Fixed broken behavior in case of write failure. More specifically: > - Only try to mark a block bad if the errors are EIO. Other errors > will abort the tool. > - Also abort the tool if the marking fails instead of ignoring it. > > Signed-off-by: Jehan Bing <jehan@orb.com> Looks good to me, pushed, thanks.
--- a/nandwrite.c 2009-06-08 13:31:14.000000000 -0700 +++ b/nandwrite.c 2009-06-08 13:33:32.000000000 -0700 @@ -586,6 +586,10 @@ int main(int argc, char * const argv[]) erase_info_t erase; perror ("pwrite"); + if (errno != EIO) { + goto closeall; + } + /* Must rewind to blockstart if we can */ rewind_blocks = (mtdoffset - blockstart) / meminfo.writesize; /* Not including the one we just attempted */ rewind_bytes = (rewind_blocks * meminfo.writesize) + readlen; @@ -602,7 +606,9 @@ int main(int argc, char * const argv[]) (long)erase.start, (long)erase.start+erase.length-1); if (ioctl(fd, MEMERASE, &erase) != 0) { perror("MEMERASE"); - goto closeall; + if (errno != EIO) { + goto closeall; + } } if (markbad) { @@ -610,7 +616,7 @@ int main(int argc, char * const argv[]) fprintf(stderr, "Marking block at %08lx bad\n", (long)bad_addr); if (ioctl(fd, MEMSETBADBLOCK, &bad_addr)) { perror("MEMSETBADBLOCK"); - /* But continue anyway */ + goto closeall; } } mtdoffset = blockstart + meminfo.erasesize;