Originally Posted by pkrstr
Will my i9305 die too, or only the i9300 is afected?
If you have VTU00M fwrev 0xf1 flash, you are probably at risk. I9305 is too new to tell
Originally Posted by leroytorner
In today's SamMobile article, they say is a firm bug!!?????? In other words, sammy firm only have the bug?? If I use (no because my phone deaths on 12/27) aosp rom and custom kernel, bug not affect my device???
No. In fact, there's nothing that indicates there is a bug in the bootloader/kernel/system firmware yet. Given the behavior of the problem and Samsung's past history, it's likely a bug in internal eMMC firmware (which can, at best be field-patched if it only involves a few bytes of microcode - major changes are not possible in the field.) This upcoming update likely contains a workaround for that eMMC bug.
Look at the Superbrick bug - There was no underlying "bug" in any of Samsung's firmwares, except that they didn't block commands that would trigger a known bug in the underlying flash memory. Now, in any hardware without that bug, issuing secure erase commands is fine. The workaround for the bug is simple: Don't send secure erase commands to the damn chip.
Originally Posted by zadusimple
Is it true that all 16gigs phone will die soon one day?
Sent from a better Galaxy designed for humans!
Unknown. Right now any device with VTU00M flash is at risk - but how high the risk is we don't know.
Originally Posted by clin81
but Samsung says that will fix the issue with fw update.....or not?
there is no fw going to write to the NAND?
No one knows yet. If it's done in the kernel, we'll know EXACTLY what/how they fixed it and how to apply the fix to custom firmwares. If it's the bootloader, we won't know unless they explicitly states that they changed the bootloader to fix it. If it's in /system (HIGHLY unlikely) we might see something.
Most likely place they'll fix this is the kernel with a variant of the Sumrall patch from last spring, OR an alteration to the MMC code in order to avoid doing something (we don't know what) that the chip doesn't like (this would be similar to how Superbrick is worked around). So far, every time Samsung has ever fixed or worked around an eMMC bug/defect, it's been in the kernel and not the bootloader. So everyone flashing this new bootloader is just making it more likely they'll be denied warranty support if their device dies.
Originally Posted by Motogp1
Yes the current btu release (today)apparently has sudden death fix via the bootloader.
I recommend updating via pc odin as mobile odin won't fix the bootloader, Im already on samsung 4.1.2 release at christmas just downlaoding todays release.
Bull****. You have ZERO evidence to substantiate this claim.
Originally Posted by clin81
so we can only wait for the new bootloader from Samsung ....
And why do you think it's the bootloader? There's no evidence to say WHERE the fix will be applied because there isn't even any information about HOW the failures are occurring. Right now, I'd say it's most likely going to be a kernel fix.
Originally Posted by jody2k
Yes but its like a chain reaction: if one component or sector dies mostly the other ones will follow. Freezes and hookups are those signs of hardware failure.
As long if those symptoms doesnt apair you dont need to worry too much
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
If it's a wear leveller bug, there's a possibility fixed wear leveller firmware might "repair" damage to the internal data structures.
Originally Posted by InfX
Can someone please explain... if it's a wear leveler, and thats a part of eMMC (as opposed to software-only wear leveling), how is it even possible to update it? Can one possibly update the eMMC microcode ?!
Search before posting. I posted an example of how this has been done to Samsung eMMC chips in the past only 1-2 days ago. (Search this thread for Sumrall...)
Minor eMMC microcode updates can be done at runtime. It's fairly safe since it apparently patches the firmware after it has loaded into volatile memory (and hence a power cycle removes the patch if it's misapplied). This is what the Galaxy Nexus patch for VYL00M/KYL00M/MAG4FA fwrev 0x25 did.
Major eMMC microcode updates can't be done so easily, which is why the underlying Superbrick flaw was never fixed.
Don't make definitive claims you have no evidence to support.