On Thursday, October 25, 2018 10:57:48 AM CEST Koen Vandeputte wrote:
>
> On 23.10.18 17:43, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> > Sorry, hit "Send" by accident
> >
> > On Tuesday, October 23, 2018 2:37:16 PM CEST Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> >> On 22.10.18 19:27, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> >>> On Monday, October 22, 2018 3:48:29 PM CEST Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> >>>> On 20.10.18 17:46, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> >>>>> On 10/18/2018 02:28 PM, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> >>>>>> starting from upstream commit 577b4eb23811 ("ubi: Reject MLC NAND")
> >>>>>> it is not allowed to use UBI and UBIFS on a MLC flavoured NAND flash
> >>>>>> chip. [1]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> According to David Oberhollenzer [2]:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The real problem is that on MLC NAND, pages come in pairs.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Multiple voltage levels inside a single, physical memory cell are used
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> encode more than one bit. Instead of just having pages that are twice
> >>>>>> as big,
> >>>>>> the flash exposes them as *two different pages*. Those pages are
> >>>>>> usually not
> >>>>>> ordered sequentially either, but according to a vendor/device specific
> >>>>>> pairing scheme.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Within OpenWrt, devices utilizing this type of flash,
> >>>>>> combined with ubi(fs) will be bricked when a user upgrades
> >>>>>> from 17.01.4 to a newer version as the MLC will be refused.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As these devices are currently advertised as supported by OpenWrt,
> >>>>>> we should at least maintain the original state during the lifecycle
> >>>>>> of the current releases.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Support can be gracefully ended when a new release-branch is created.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Koen Vandeputte <koen.vandepu...@ncentric.com>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=v4.14.77&id=577b4eb23811dfc8e38924dc476dbc866be74253
> >>>>>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/920344/
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Mainly intended for discussion first on this approach before applying
> >>>>>> it.
> >>>>>> Can be cherrypicked to 18.06.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Feel free to drop your (n)ack on this approach
> >>>>> Have you checked if these are really MLC chips or if they are just
> >>>>> getting detected wrongly?
> >>>>> I think I saw some SPI NAND chips which a patched Linux detected as MLC
> >>>>> but the datasheet said they are SLC chips.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hauke
> >>>> Very good point.
> >>>> I've requested Mikrotik this morning to provide some details about the
> >>>> actual chips being used since the launch of that board ..
> >>> For the RB450/G you can take a look at the User Guide on their side:
> >>> <https://mikrotik.com/product/RB450G#fndtn-downloads>
> >>> <https://i.mt.lv/cdn/rb_files/rb450GugA.pdf>
> >>>
> >>> On Page 3 there's a "System Board View" with a bottom view of the PCB
> >>> and this is where the NAND chip is located. It reads:
> >>>
> >>> HY27UT084G2A
> >>>
> >>> This translates to:
> >>> <http://natisbad.org/NAS/refs/Hynix_NAND_flash_part_number_decoding.pdf>
> >>>
> >>> HY27UT084G2A
> >>> ||||
> >>> |||^--- T = MLC + Single Die + Large Block
> >>> ||^---U = 2.7V~3.6V
> >>> |^---7 = NAND FLASH
> >>> ^---2 = FLASH
> >>>
> >>> So, it is NAND MLC FLASH.
> >>>
> >> Received a reply from Mikrotik tech dept.:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Mainly there are two possible NAND chips for RB450G:
> >> W29N04GVSIAA (see attachment);
> >> MT29F4G08ABADAWPD.
> >>
> >> Can you provide some device serial numbers?
> >>
> >> Checking the datasheets from both chips mentioned above shows they are
> >> both SLC flash.
> >> @Christian, do you have this board? Could you provide the serial?
> > No, luckily it isn't one of mine. But Mikrotik want to dig: I do have a
> > serial number
> > of an affected board: 1DFC018EF642.
>
> Just got a reply back from Mikrotik.
>
> It seems this serial is not correct?
Ok, I found a better barcode reader. It says:
1DFC018FF642
The eight letter changed from E to F. Maybe the two reporters
(FS#1778 and FS#1830) can also provide their Serial #? But I don't
think they know of this thread?
The question is: What would the serial # actually solve? I don't
think MikroTik would replace the affected boards. After all they
are "supported" by their own MikoTik RouterOS. And I don't think
that UBI will run on MLC in the near future either [0].
Maybe there is a way out: The RB450G has a microsd slot. So the
rootfs could be placed on it. Of course, this requires a specialized
image as well as built-in support for CONFIG_MMC_SPI to read from
the sd-card. And for the overlay: CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP, the F2FS
(CONFIG_F2FS_FS, ...) and EXT4 (CONFIG_EXT4_FS) as well as
userspace tools: mkf2fs e2fsprogs f2fsck e2fsprogs.
(Along with a cmdline patch to tell the kernel that the rootfs is
located on the mmc)
Regards,
Christian
[0] Micron has released a few patches over the years that *they
"think"* are necessary for getting UBI to work on their own MLC
NAND Flash: You can find the patches (most of them dated from
2016) here:
<https://www.micron.com/products/nand-flash/mlc-nand/mlc-nand-software>
|1. mtd-nand-use-a-lower-value-for-badblockbits-when-working-with-MLC-NAND
| MLC NANDs have more bit flips that SLC. When looking for bad block
marker
| we have a lot of false positive if we check for the whole byte. To avoid
| this tolerate a few (4 here) bit flips for byte.
|
|2. fixup-ubi-cannot-recover-master node issue
| For MLC NAND, paired page issue is now a common known issue. This patch
| is just for master node cannot be recovered while there will two pages
| be dameged in one single master block.
|
|3. UBI power loss issue for paired page Ver2.0
| These patches aim to solve MLC NAND paired page power loss issue by
| adding a bakvol (backup volume) module in UBI layer. 70 series and
| 80 series families.
Micron' engineers also tried to "upstream" the patches but didn't succeed.
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
