**Ultimate GS3 sudden death thread**

Search This thread

rajataghi

Member
Dec 9, 2012
29
3
Agreed. This is my last Samsung phone. Will never buy any other Samsung phone irrespective of its features. :/

Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
 

aalvico

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2010
962
160
São Paulo
So unroot it and let it die:

1. Run TriangleAway
2. Open ODIN on your PC
3. Flash an official 4.1.1 ROM (try a branded one in case yours was carrier branded)
4. Let it die and send it to Samsung

The flash counter only goes up if you flash an unofficial ROM (at least, if you're on the old bootloader).

Don't do that. If your phone keep the access to download mode after die it will lose the product name and system status will change to custom. Unfortunately Samsung is not serious and will keep its strategy to say that sudden death only happens in rooted devices in all the countries they can. If you tell about countries where they are fixing they will say only can assist phones from your country. So even if your phone was never been root it will be your fault.
That is not about lack of information of service center or customer service. I think they planned.. Lose customers is more interesting that admit they did something wrong and didn't provide a recall and with their horrible 4.1.2 fix maybe they just tried to make your phone survive until the one year (most countries) warranty is over.
Also the orientation to fix 4.1.2 freezes (at least here) for service centers is reflash firmware, so get ready to go many times to service center.
Than the only solution will be if someone discover how to make it completely die (if you decide the risk light a candle and pray for completelly death) or wait for a better firmware fix (up to there try the dummy files solution over and over).
Sorry if Samsung fans disagree. In my country that is the truth. They have the screen to say you "rooted" you have nothing official to support you. Probably if you tell about XDA they will say is a community knew for people looking for customize their devices by their own risk.
All that doesn't mean I think you should not try the battle, I didn't give up yet. Now I am trying to report to newspapers and magazines.
Not succeed on facebook or they ignored or sent a link to contact customer service, after so many complains I got blocked to post in their page...considering to fix here is the same price than buy a nexus 4 in the US, I decided to ask a friend to buy one for me (I will really miss my extra 64gb and LG is also no reliable) and keep the battle.


Sent from my X10 using xda app-developers app
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sohagpnk and ponepo

Roadrunner100

Senior Member
May 10, 2009
303
23
Class Action

Samsung will continue its method of denying clients affected with SDS with BS claims as we've seen on this thread, until a Class Action suit is launched against them. This will probably be the only way to get them to formally launch a recall program.

As we've seen, for a private customer to claim against a conglomerate is mostly a futile exercise, and depends mostly on the
"Good Will" of your local agent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aalvico

Kjc99

Senior Member
Dec 22, 2012
1,178
252
Anchorage
Don't do that. If your phone keep the access to download mode after die it will lose the product name and system status will change to custom. Unfortunately Samsung is not serious and will keep its strategy to say that sudden death only happens in rooted devices in all the countries they can. If you tell about countries where they are fixing they will say only can assist phones from your country. So even if your phone was never been root it will be your fault.
That is not about lack of information of service center or customer service. I think they planned.. Lose customers is more interesting that admit they did something wrong and didn't provide a recall and with their horrible 4.1.2 fix maybe they just tried to make your phone survive until the one year (most countries) warranty is over.
Also the orientation to fix 4.1.2 freezes (at least here) for service centers is reflash firmware, so get ready to go many times to service center.
Than the only solution will be if someone discover how to make it completely die (if you decide the risk light a candle and pray for completelly death) or wait for a better firmware fix (up to there try the dummy files solution over and over).
Sorry if Samsung fans disagree. In my country that is the truth. They have the screen to say you "rooted" you have nothing official to support you. Probably if you tell about XDA they will say is a community knew for people looking for customize their devices by their own risk.
All that doesn't mean I think you should not try the battle, I didn't give up yet. Now I am trying to report to newspapers and magazines.
Not succeed on facebook or they ignored or sent a link to contact customer service, after so many complains I got blocked to post in their page...considering to fix here is the same price than buy a nexus 4 in the US, I decided to ask a friend to buy one for me (I will really miss my extra 64gb and LG is also no reliable) and keep the battle.


Sent from my X10 using xda app-developers app

If only there were a way to fully kill a half SDS phone then it would be a lot easier to claim warranty if their was no cosmetic or water damage...

Galaxy S3
Omega Rom V37
 

jeffnz

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2011
416
185
67
Auckland
Samsung Galaxy S20
Samsung will continue its method of denying clients affected with SDS with BS claims as we've seen on this thread, until a Class Action suit is launched against them. This will probably be the only way to get them to formally launch a recall program.

As we've seen, for a private customer to claim against a conglomerate is mostly a futile exercise, and depends mostly on the
"Good Will" of your local agent.

very impressive call to arms but you aren't putting forward facts , the reality is they are replacing phones as is evident even in this thread. Some of the claims on here maybe BS but we are only hearing one side of it from people who are justifiably annoyed and probably emotionally charged.

I can't see any reason why they would have a recall as it isn't a health & safety issue nor would it make sense to recall phones that may or may mot die.

I think we all understand the frustration of those people whose phones have died and the ones that haven't been able to get them replaced under warranty but I for one don't want my phone recalled, if it dies it dies I live in country that has consumer guarantee's so I'm confident that unless there is proven water damage of physical damage I'll get a replacement .
 

zigson

Senior Member
Jul 26, 2010
297
52
Hi everyone. I've suddenly started getting freezes, so in case this leads to SDS, I want to return my phone to stock completely. I've found advice on how to reinstall a stock ROM from my carrier. What I'm missing is how to remove root and remove custom recovery, both of which I guess could be detected by the manufacturer if I need to return my device. Can anyone please confirm that I will also need to take both these addition steps and point me in the direction of some instructions. Much appreciated.

By the way: I'm gutted. Really liked this phone, but in the past couple of days it has become totally unusable. I've been following this thread since the first page and always expected that the bug would find me in the end. I bought the phone on day of release in the UK, so it's well past the 6 months danger point which people usually talk about, but luckily still within warranty.
 

camil

Senior Member
Jul 20, 2008
120
70
Hi everyone. I've suddenly started getting freezes, so in case this leads to SDS, I want to return my phone to stock completely. I've found advice on how to reinstall a stock ROM from my carrier. What I'm missing is how to remove root and remove custom recovery, both of which I guess could be detected by the manufacturer if I need to return my device. Can anyone please confirm that I will also need to take both these addition steps and point me in the direction of some instructions. Much appreciated.

By the way: I'm gutted. Really liked this phone, but in the past couple of days it has become totally unusable. I've been following this thread since the first page and always expected that the bug would find me in the end. I bought the phone on day of release in the UK, so it's well past the 6 months danger point which people usually talk about, but luckily still within warranty.

yes, you need to unroot your phone. Here is a good tutorial for you http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1710613&highlight=how+to+unroot
 
  • Like
Reactions: zigson

ddurgan

New member
Feb 21, 2013
2
1
Having the same problems with the handset

I have a i9300 from the Three mobile phone company. My problems as described by others started three weeks ago. I flashed the phone through Kies several times but the problems did not go away. I discovered this thread and took my phone back to the shop I bought it from. They told me I would have to send it away through them. I also told them I had re-flashed it and it must be a hardware fault. Two weeks later the phone came back from repair, all they had done was re-flashed it again and said they could not find a fault. The fault still existed and I was very disappointed in Three's customer service.

I have now logged the fault with Samsung direct and the phone was picked up today by a courier. Fingers crossed it actually gets fixed this time.

A word of note, Samsung were very keen to ask if the phone had been rooted or had a custom ROM on it which I have never done. I did point out to the support person that if the phone has a hardware fault, then whatever software it has on it should not break the warranty (they did not agree to this view). If you do tell them you have flashed the phone yourself, make sure you tell them it was the Kies software and not Odin.

I will post if I had any luck getting my phone fixed in the UK by Samsung.
 

Roadrunner100

Senior Member
May 10, 2009
303
23
very impressive call to arms but you aren't putting forward facts , the reality is they are replacing phones as is evident even in this thread. Some of the claims on here maybe BS but we are only hearing one side of it from people who are justifiably annoyed and probably emotionally charged.

This isn't a call to arms. It's a practical solution. Some phones are being repaired, not all. There's enough substantial material on this thread to show that Samsung's approach is to find excuses for not replacing MB's. We've heard from users who have not Rooted their devices being turned away because their device has a "scratch". We've heard owners being abandoned to battle local providers and independent labs as a buffer for Samsung,

"I can't see any reason why they would have a recall as it isn't a health & safety issue nor would it make sense to recall phones that may or may mot die."

Recalls in consumer electronics are not restricted to health & safety issues.

I think we all understand the frustration of those people whose phones have died and the ones that haven't been able to get them replaced under warranty but I for one don't want my phone recalled, if it dies it dies I live in country that has consumer guarantee's so I'm confident that unless there is proven water damage of physical damage I'll get a replacement .

Your local provider might indeed be more forthcoming, however that doesn't seem to be the prevailing case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zetlorf

aalvico

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2010
962
160
São Paulo
very impressive call to arms but you aren't putting forward facts , the reality is they are replacing phones as is evident even in this thread. Some of the claims on here maybe BS but we are only hearing one side of it from people who are justifiably annoyed and probably emotionally charged.

I can't see any reason why they would have a recall as it isn't a health & safety issue nor would it make sense to recall phones that may or may mot die.

I think we all understand the frustration of those people whose phones have died and the ones that haven't been able to get them replaced under warranty but I for one don't want my phone recalled, if it dies it dies I live in country that has consumer guarantee's so I'm confident that unless there is proven water damage of physical damage I'll get a replacement .

Not that easy, you forgot to consider how the annoying freezes from 4.1.2 can affect you, losing time, calls and really disturbing who use phone for work and nobody knows what is next with this memory.
Lucky of you if you keep happy if your phone die one day after warranty expires.
But keep in mind fixing phones in some countries are been paying for the ones they can avoid with their global denial.

Sent from my X10 using xda app-developers app
 

jeffnz

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2011
416
185
67
Auckland
Samsung Galaxy S20
@roadrunner so what are the actual numbers of people being turned down for warranty. What percentage of phones have failed, any idea??? if not then what are you actually basing your comments on, a couple of threads and how many of those that are effected are posting here ??
"Call to arms" metaphorically speaking.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

---------- Post added at 07:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:08 AM ----------

@aalvico I haven't forgotten anything just trying to put things into perspective before people get too emotional and common sense disappears out the window.
The reality is that not all phones are effected so if you recall millions of phones it would be a logistical nightmare and people would be more frustrated than they are now.
Granted the whole thing is a mess but Lets not get too carried away, at least not until we even know what it is and how it can be/is fixed

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjc99

dave4bren

Member
Feb 12, 2011
33
8
Mine had the sudden death... took it in to CarPhoneWarehouse and they sent it to there engineers, I didn't even buy it from their. It had the insane chip b4 it went... now it hasn't... They said they replaced the PBA (what ever that is)...

So the moral is try CarPhoneWarehouse, they fixed mine

The binary counter was on 6 as well but now its on 0 :laugh:
 

aalvico

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2010
962
160
São Paulo
@jeffnz I think you are only considering a public recall, taking for cars examples you also should know that are problems they never tell you because they can fix on inspections or others are procedures to solve knowing issues . The point is there is no issue for non rooted devices for Samsung and that is not true. If in your country they need to fix even rooted is not exactly because they liked or admitted that there is a problem. The number of phones involved probably is not a crazy one . So the problem is the denial
Not emotional arguments... Facts, fix the phone is 350 USD here plus warranty cancelled.
Fact, since no official problem with the eMMC there are still 0xf1 for replaces here.
Fact, since no official problem with 4.1.1 (only unbranded phones have 4.1.2 here) they will flash 4.1.1 back
Fact, if break again during the limited service center warranty with the download mode access sorry limited warranty cancelled.
I don't see emotional arguments, anyway different points of view.

Sent from my X10 using xda app-developers app
 
  • Like
Reactions: zetlorf

Roadrunner100

Senior Member
May 10, 2009
303
23
@roadrunner so what are the actual numbers of people being turned down for warranty. What percentage of phones have failed, any idea??? if not then what are you actually basing your comments on, a couple of threads and how many of those that are effected are posting here ??

Nope, I haven't the statistics, but neither do you. However, do a google search, don't limit the results to English, I'm satisfied that this is beyond statistical coincidence. Bottom line - Class Action Suits begin with a collection of individuals with a common complaint joining forces. That's when statistics become reality, as the complaints are aggregated.

You are viewing this through an "I'm alright Jack" perspective, - I get it, your local representatives are playing nice.
 

shethsa

Senior Member
Dec 23, 2010
586
46
Mumbai
I guess one way to make resellers aware is to ask for an s3 32 gb and when they try to hard sell you 16gb tell them why you don't want to risk your hard earned money on it. They will probably have your sympathy at the least and understand that it is a widespread problem.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2
 

Top Liked Posts

  • There are no posts matching your filters.
  • 85
    **** SAMSUNG HAVE APPLIED A SUDDEN DEATH FIX VIA A SOFTWARE UPDATE****

    STOCK KERNEL: XXELKC AND NEWER

    STOCK RECOVERY: XXELKC AND NEWER

    ALSO ANY CUSTOM KERNEL AND RECOVERY THAT ARE BUILT FROM THE UPDATED SOURCES. THERE HAVE BEEN CASES OF SDS ON DEVICES THAT HAVE UPDATED BUT TO WHAT EXTENT THE DAMAGE WAS AT ALREADY BEFORE FLASHING WE DON'T KNOW.



    WHO'S AFFECTED?
    It seems that at the moment the only devices that have suffered from SDS are the 16GB version with:
    eMMC: VTU00M
    FW Rev: 0xF1


    To check your eMMC version download eMMC Brickbug Check from Google Play.
    What you want is the eMMC version and the FW Rev.



    THE FIX
    Samsung have now released a Sudden Death Fix via a patched Kernel and Recovery in latest firmware. Firmware Version: XXELKC

    Simply update OTA or download XXELKC firmware (or newer) from sammobile.com and flash using Odin.

    You need both the stock recovery and kernel installed for it to work properly, or a custom kernel and recovery built from the updated sources
    ie Latest Perseus Kernel and PhilZ Recovery are examples



    LINKS
    For more info about SDS, who could be effected and how to fix check out this awesome thread by rootSU

    For a detailed look at how the fix works check out this thread here.


    WARRANTY
    For those of you in Europe who have rooted your phone it appears that this doesn't void warranty. Check this thread for more info.
    Also this website could prove very handy for anyone with a European or UK handset that has died.
    40
    Just took a look at the diffs and i have to admit, i don't nearly get what this does. What are those "movi commands"? Where can one find a data-sheet to decode the magics? :(

    BTW, just took the kernel image from the WanamLite v5.3 CWM zip (that's what i am currently running), un-gz-ed it, and actually found the "movi operation is failed" error string in there. Good for me, i guess ;)

    AndreiLux, thanks A LOT for your research.
    You won't. These are HIGHLY proprietary to Samsung's storage people.

    I'd hazard a guess that it does - but I'd certainly like someone like Entropy to weigh in.
    Bah, I wish I could see what you quoted. As far as safety goes:
    90%+ chance that the change in Update7 is the fix.
    75% chance that XXELLA/4/etc have the fix (It's possible, but highly unlikely, that the string VTU00M would appear in the kernel without the fix.

    Is there a way to check if I already have any bad blocks on my eMMC?
    This isn't about bad blocks - this is about a firmware bug where a data structure gets suddenly corrupted. You can really only know "is it working" or "is it dead". The one exception seems to be that some people see odd performance issues just before death, similar to the issues people see when using PIT workarounds for Superbrick.

    Just as I said above, the low-level details of what's going on are HIGHLY proprietary to Samsung.
    The patch additionally checks that the firmware date is 2012/04/13 and only applies the commands then.

    So you need type: VTU00M revision: 0xf1 and internal firmware date of 2012/04/13 for the bug to have an effect. The date which eMMC brickbug checker reads is the production date as it seems.

    So there might be phones with VTU00M/0xf1 out there which are not affected, I don't know if that makes sense in regard that if the revision would even be the same then.
    Yeah. I'm wondering if we should add some printk()s to check what the date is. I'm curious if there are other dates floating around.

    No, the date shown in the eMMC app is the production date, the internal firmware date is something else and not possible to read out through normal methods.
    Correct, although we could add a printk to kernels to print out the info.

    eMMC app gives me: 05/2012
    but checking via the SSID gives me: 2012/06/09.
    So two different dates, but none of them is the internal firmware date, correct?
    Correct.

    Most phones died over night after charging. Since there are many defective chargers, can this be related to a faulty charger? For example, I have my sgs3 for about 6 months and a few days ago charging became very slow (didnt charge fully after whole night). I used HTC's charger and charging is nornal again. Ive seen that many sgs3 owners got problems with charger. Can some faulty chargers start charging very skow and others give too much electricty which burns internals?

    Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
    No. Seriously - READ. It is at this point unambiguously an eMMC firmware failure that has NOTHING to do with the charger.

    The ONLY connection with charging is this: CHARGING HOLDS A WAKELOCK. This means the device will do various tasks in the background that it wouldn't do in deep sleep, some of which perform I/O cycles on the eMMC.

    The patch to the MMC driver discovered in the Update 7 sources released by Samsung performs a procedure that is nearly identical to the fix for another mmc firmware bug in a different samsung device.

    The patch also includes some character strings which can be searched for in the binary kernel of XXELLA, as when code is compiled, strings are left as they are.

    The kernel from the XXELLA firmware DOES include these strings, so it's probably safe to assume that the kernel includes the code that performs the in-RAM fix to the mmc firmware.

    The fact that some people have reported that they've experienced SDS on the XXELLA ROM is interesting - none have confirmed 100% that they had the XXELLA kernel running (to the best of my knowledge). This means that for some reason they may have been running another kernel that doesn't have the patch.
    So far all of them were running other kernels.

    It's just like the people who claimed they Superbricked on stock recovery. Turns out that in their eyes, fakeflashing CWM from stock recovery was still in some twisted way stock recovery... It wasn't.

    I'm still confused. Some posts say lla kernel is safe others say you need Perseus. So which one is it

    Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
    Perseus is 90% guaranteed to be safe (I'm not claiming 100% without a detailed technical explanation from Samsung. Even then I'm not claiming 100%, just like I refuse to guarantee that nonsecure erase is safe on Superbrick-vulnerable devices even though Samsung claims it is... As a result anything I release has eMMC TRIM/ERASE completely disabled for those devices.
    ELLA/4/etc are 75%+ guaranteed to be safe - since we THINK they have the same patch

    If i understood it correctly, we have an assumption? that because similar code is implemented in kernels for similar problems in other samsung phones, so that means we have the same problem in S3.
    If this is true then all or almost all 16GB phones are affected, as i didnt saw a phone with different emmc.(maybe some new phones have newer revision?)
    We are talking then for millions S3's that are going to die?
    Maybe this code then doesnt have to do anything with the "SDS issue" and is more of a precaution or even testing trying to figure out the problem from Samsung?
    Samsung's storage guys have a wide variety of chips/models. VTU00M 0xf1 is primarily seen in I9300 units, and almost all 16GB I9300s except very recent ones have it. Some other devices have it, but it isn't nearly as prevalent in other devices. My Note 10.1 has MAG4FB I think (need to check again...) In addition, there appears to be some additional identifying information beyond VTU00M 0xf1 that we haven't had time to collect data on yet (and developers need to make kernel patches to even allow this data to be collected...)

    I think that it's combination is the solution.

    according to this from 1st post:

    ...Kernels >v31 and beyond stock LLA are now the only truly protected ones.

    Can someone confirm this?
    the key in that post is the word "now". That post was made yesterday - the patch has been making the rounds and is getting integrated

    Have you searched for it in older kernels? Why wouldn't that string appear also in those? If it does, then this means nothing.
    That's something that needs to be checked... However if it appears in older kernels Samsung was violating the GPL with them as I'm fairly certain it is nowhere within the source.

    Nothing can fix an SDS because the phone is already dead. :D
    But to prevent it, yes it seems. One of those at this moment.
    Just like Superbrick.

    Samsung haven't fixed the super brick bug yet :p

    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
    On a small subset of affected devices they have - I9100s in HK apparently have Jellybean and that has their official fix. But so far, nearly all affected devices are still on ICS and they only put the fix in JB kernels.

    Just did a emmc check and I found out that my fwrev is oxf7 and the date is 11/2012... But I got the same chip like otherss... :(

    So am I on a safer side?

    Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
    Unknown. Often flaws like this are firmware-dependent.

    For example:
    VYL00M/KYL00M/MAG4FA fwrev 0x19 = Superbrick + 32kb-of-zeroes bug
    VYL00M/KYL00M/MAG4FA fwrev 0x25 = 32kb-of-zeroes bug only (immune to Superbrick)

    However for the above, we had confirmation from a trusted source (A Google engineer) that 0x19 had a bug with the symptoms we were seeing and that HE had seen it in GNex prototypes, and that 0x25 was "fixed" in regards to that bug (Superbrick). A fix for the bug in 0x25 is what led us to him.

    Theoretically if you have the same chip, you are candidate for sds sometime.... :(
    Not necessarily. I would put the status as "unknown". If you have VTU00M 0xf7 you're much less likely to have problems than 0xf1 - but with something like this guarantees cannot be made.

    Also: The fix patch was merged to CM10.1 source last night. So today's nightly should be safe. If it's not - no one is safe.
    30
    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

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    so we can only wait for the new bootloader from Samsung .... :crying:
    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.

    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.

    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.


    [KIES]I9300XXELLA 4.1.2->EXYNOS BUG FIXED!!S3 SUDDEN DEATH FIXED!!Jan.02,2013

    http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2077844
    Don't make definitive claims you have no evidence to support.
    27
    Hi all,

    Assuming that there is no NAND degradation or similar and that SDS come for something specific, why over 90% of the deaths have come from the fourth month onwards? Why have not failed at 4 days or two weeks, for example? What is the secret component involved over time to fail?

    We will likely never know the specific secret component, but with knowledge of the behavior of eMMC, how it behaves, and how Samsung eMMCs have failed in the past, we can guess.

    The wear leveller keeps track of what memory blocks have been used and what haven't, and relocates blocks periodically to spread wear across the device. For example, if you write to the fourth block of the eMMC repeatedly, internally it'll map the fourth block to the 100th, then maybe the 150th, then 200th, etc...

    At some point, after a long time of operation, the wear leveller might reach a corner case where a bug is triggered - my guess would be an integer overflow or a signed vs. unsigned issue. For example, it's working with the 32767th instance of block 5, and tries to increment a counter to 32768 - but instead, gets -32768 instead because something is treating an unsigned int as signed. The next time it tries to work with that counter, BOOM - it crashes. Again, we don't know the exact nature of what's happening, but it's likely something along these lines.

    It's very similar to what happened with Superbrick on the GS2 - if you issued a secure erase command to erase memory that was in a certain specific state (I can't talk about what the exact state is, sorry... And no, there's no way to tell if the memory is in that state unless you're Samsung or you've Superbricked it.), the wear leveller would crash and leave behind corrupted data structures - any attempt to access these structures again would crash the wear leveller again. The symptom to the user was any attempt to access affected regions of the eMMC would cause the chip to hang.
    22
    Entropy512, thank you.
    How can you explain users that had XXELLA stock rom, and still suffered from SDS? There are more than one report of it.
    I have yet to see any such reports... The one report I've seen of an XXELLA failure was XXELLA system + Siyah.

    You are being unecessarilhy harsh here, especially considering that you are addressing people who are under the fear that their expensive phones will die on them suddenly. AdreiLux seems to be more skeptical regarding the possibility of the fix depending on the new bootloader as well. Calling names surely doesn't make you look smarter than the "idiots" who took a step -granted maybe rushed- towards a probable fix of a dreadful issue. And you may know much more than the average joe here, but you still have ZERO evidence that the new bootloader doesn't do anything at all that contributes to fixing the SDS, so you may have as well been nicer. Just my 2 cents.
    I have all of the evidence I need - I now have kernel source for a complete eMMC firmware patch. The fix is in the kernel, not in the bootloader. It's being patched in the EXACT same way as the GNex 32kb-of-zeros fix patch, which had zero bootloader involvement.

    The fact is that flashing a bootloader is a fundamentally dangerous operation, and flashing a bootloader with known regressions in functionality is 100% reckless and stupid.

    The fact is that Samsung has NEVER fixed a problem like this in the bootloader before. There was ZERO evidence pointing there. There was plenty of evidence (the GNex VYL00M/KYL00M/MAG4FA 0x25 patch) pointing to the fix being in the kernel when it came out.

    How come you knew that SDS is related to eMMC (and specifically version VTU00M) before samsung released their code? What led to this assumption?
    All of the symptoms and behavior pointed this way.
    1) Some devices were exhibiting "Superbrick-ish" behavior where certain eMMC regions were working and others were inaccessible
    2) It was ONLY happening on 16GB devices - this is the most obvious piece of evidence. If it weren't the eMMC, it would have been seen on 32/64GB devices
    3) It would be the third time in one year Samsung has ****ed up their wear leveller, their quality control is clearly crap in this regard.