From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from www.aostechnologies.com ([195.134.130.80] helo=pip5.mpl.ch) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.22 #5 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1A9fyB-0001My-P5 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 08:21:19 +0100 Received: from elsoft.ch (IDENT:1000@pcdm.elsoft.loc [192.168.11.10]) h9F7K153016781 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:20:15 +0200 Message-ID: <3F8CF52E.1050502@elsoft.ch> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:20:14 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22David_M=FCller_=28ELSOFT_AG=29=22?= MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org References: <3C6BEE8B5E1BAC42905A93F13004E8AB03202232@mailse01.axis.se> In-Reply-To: <3C6BEE8B5E1BAC42905A93F13004E8AB03202232@mailse01.axis.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: word line disturbance List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hello Magnus Mårtensson wrote: > Hi. > I had a discussion with flash manufacturer Atmel last week regarding a phenomenon that we had seen. > The phenomenon was called "word line disturbance" and it could occur if you tried to program only ones > to a location that already contained ones. The result could be that some bit on another address got tainted. Ex > writing 0xffff to address A could result in the content on address B changing from 0xffff to 0xfffe. > Does anybody know more about the technical background of this "it's not a bug, it's a feature" problem? Or is it just a manager driven decision to save some money at the wrong place? Dave