[PATCH] nandwrite: add --nobad to write bad blocks

[Mike Frysinger]

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 02:23, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 15:05 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 12:27, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 23:51 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> >> Sometimes dumping bad blocks is useful, like when the block isn't actually
>> >> bad but the OOB layout isn't what the kernel is expecting or is otherwise
>> >> screwed up.  The --nobad option allows just that.
>> >
>> > How useful is this? I think instead you should implement the force flag
>> > we discussed and deal with 'otherwise screwed up' eraseblocks with
>> > flash_erase. I am afraid it is too dangerous to introduce this option.
>>
>> i dont see how this is any more dangerous than adding an option to
>> force erasing of bad blocks ?  why should we be over protective of the
>> system ?
>
> Because it was like this for long time and people are accustomed to the
> fact that if a block is marked as bad, nothing will happen to it.
>
> Besides, if I misuse options and lose a really bad block, it is very
> difficult to find it again.

... i dont see what any of this has to do with my proposal.  the
default behavior is unchanged, and i dont think we need to be coddling
people to not use new options.  if you dont want to "lose" things,
then dont use the new option.

>> i find it useful during development to write out the content of pages
>> irregardless of the bad blocks and then read them back.
>
> But if a block is marked as bad, the current contents of it is not
> necessarily 0xFFs and it does not necessarily ready to be written. You
> have to first erase it.
>
> So my point was - please, first provide the means to erase them.

so once we have the ability to erase them, you'll merge this ?

not that i see why we're restricting this behavior in the first place
... policy is for the end user to determine ... this is putting
artificial limits for no real reason that i can see.
-mike