[PATCH 0/8] Qi solve GTA02 dynparts compatability and parse idenity partition

[Werner Almesberger]

Paul Fertser wrote:
> Ok, i see it now. But then it's even more inconsistent and somewhat
> defeats the purpose of marking worn-out blocks ;)

Yeah, the whole logic of it is flawed. A saner alternative that
also allows for work-out blocks would be static partitions with
a statistical guarantee that they contain enough good blocks.
There's where this idea started:
http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/openmoko-kernel/2008-April/002238.html

However, switching to such a model on GTA02 would mean to
rearrange partitions, which is messy at best.

> Moreover, i
> understand that the kernel marks worn-out blocks only in BBT, but does
> NOR u-boot mark worn-out blocks in both BBT and OOB? If yes, then a
> user risks to lose his rootfs by flashing the kernel or bootloader via
> DFU.

As far as I remember, u-boot doesn't mark worn-out blocks.

>> Hmm, did they  flash_eraseall /dev/mtd3  first ?
> 
> They didn't.

Argh :-(

> The wiki has only one place where nandwrite is mentioned, and that is
> http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Flashing_the_Neo_FreeRunner#Alternative:_using_nandwrite

Oh dear. Somebody meant well, but ... :-(

So this happened about three weeks ago. I've fixed it now.

Hmm, now what do we do with the victims of this ...

- Werner