[05.09.2012] Got Brickbug ? v1.2
- Thread starter Chainfire
- Start date
Odin back to Gingerbread, root (if not rooted), and flash a safe ICS rom, like CM9.
Or, just flash speedmod or franco kernels on LPY and you can wipe data safely.
No, flash the kernel either with Mobile Odin or CWM (speedmod or franco). Don't wipe data before you flash it. After you flash one of these kernels on LPY, boot up and make sure you under About Phone it is correct. Then, you can wipe data in CWM safely.
Then, you have to either ROOT it or use PC Odin to go back to GB. I would suggest going back to GB and rooting it there.
Just wanna share this
I was unable to install this apk after trying it a few time. Later try to disable the screen filter program.
Walla it's installed. The bad news is that i got this....
Not rooted and update ICS through OTA.
And this causing the Got Brickbug won't install earlier.
Sent from my Noble Black Note
I was unable to install this apk after trying it a few time. Later try to disable the screen filter program.
Walla it's installed. The bad news is that i got this....
Not rooted and update ICS through OTA.
And this causing the Got Brickbug won't install earlier.
Sent from my Noble Black Note
for me its known that i have 0x19 cause i saw it some weeks ago running orders from terminal but fortunately i have the latest cf kernel that is not trigger the order for the emmc so i m feeling safe and i ve made some restores already...
Did you run the gotbrickbug app on your new one to see if it still has the flawed eMMC firmware?
lrcquest
Senior Member
Checked on galaxy tab 8.9 it says 0x12 & has known bug issue.
Sent from my GT-P7300 using xda premium
Sent from my GT-P7300 using xda premium
has anyone seen this before on i9100 international running on ICS ROM LPD???
eMMC chip:
Type: VIS000M
CID:....................
Revision: 0x9
how can it be 0x9?? i thought the numbers of revisions are ascending!?
i tryed to wipe the data and factory reset couple of times using standard recovery mode, and the MF wouldn't brick
eMMC chip:
Type: VIS000M
CID:....................
Revision: 0x9
how can it be 0x9?? i thought the numbers of revisions are ascending!?
i tryed to wipe the data and factory reset couple of times using standard recovery mode, and the MF wouldn't brick
Attachments
Last edited:
What if I just flash it back to pure stock with root? (Flash counters 0, etc). THEN run directly into the eMMC brick bug? What are they going to check? That I was on pure stock?
What if I just flash it back to pure stock with root? (Flash counters 0, etc). THEN run directly into the eMMC brick bug? What are they going to check? That I was on pure stock?
If you hard brick it don't matter what you got on there they ain't gonna be able to tell. But if you brick it in any other way they can easily see what you have done, and er rooting breaks warranty whether its on stock or not
---------- Post added at 04:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:48 AM ----------
Yer and guess what, its the bad chip again, so I'm on cm9 to be safe
I have the bad chip as well but I don't like CM9. I like a lot of the Samsung stuff so CM9 just doesn't get it for me. I've flashed more than 20 times to different roms and upgrades without any problems. I am very careful to make sure I never wipe data with an ICS kernel and so far so good. I don't think it's dangerous to flash, you just have to educate yourself and be careful.
SirRhor
Senior Member
So, I got my GNote with ICS Preloaded.
I ran this tool and it said my firmware has the brick bug.
So a few minutes ago, I flashed a "Directly Rootable" GB ROM so I can install custom ROMs, Kernels and what not... I installed the app again, and same result: Buggy Firmware.
I'm ignorant about this, but, Isn't the Brick Bug on the Kernel?, in my case it was Kernel 3, but now that I'm on Kernel 2, still have the Bug, how come?.
I ran this tool and it said my firmware has the brick bug.
So a few minutes ago, I flashed a "Directly Rootable" GB ROM so I can install custom ROMs, Kernels and what not... I installed the app again, and same result: Buggy Firmware.
I'm ignorant about this, but, Isn't the Brick Bug on the Kernel?, in my case it was Kernel 3, but now that I'm on Kernel 2, still have the Bug, how come?.
It's not the kernel. It's how the kernel handles the bad firmware in the eMMC chip. Some (most) of the eMMC chips have firmware that if certain commands are called it bricks the phone. Some of the ICS kernels would call these commands and the phone was toast. The GB kernels would not call these commands so that is why they were safe. No matter what, if flash back to a GB kernel and use it to flash new roms and do your wipes, you're probably safe.
i like some of the sammy stuff too but cant be bothered going to gb every time i wanna wipe and with cm9 you have the very top devs working on your rom so i would trust them much more than someone cooking up a quick rom in his bedroom if you know what i mean,plus your cool , you know what your doing and what the problems can be but a lot of people get confused especially with all the contrasting opinions out there, me, i wanna just stay safe for now till sammy pull there fingers out and revise their software , my advice ,if your not sure ...dont flash it...read read read..stay safe
SirRhor
Senior Member
Thank you for the info. Now I get it.
Could Samsung fix the eMMC firmware with a updated ROM then, or another kind of fix is needed?
No it's my understanding that the firmware that is bad is specifically built into this chip and not changeable. The gotbrickbug app tells you if you have a chip that has the old code or not. If my understanding is not correct, I'm sure one of the Dev's will straighten this out.
i like some of the sammy stuff too but cant be bothered going to gb every time i wanna wipe and with cm9 you have the very top devs working on your rom so i would trust them much more than someone cooking up a quick rom in his bedroom if you know what i mean,plus your cool , you know what your doing and what the problems can be but a lot of people get confused especially with all the contrasting opinions out there, me, i wanna just stay safe for now till sammy pull there fingers out and revise their software , my advice ,if your not sure ...dont flash it...read read read..stay safe
Hey that's what's great about this forum. To each is own. Good luck to you and I hope the CM9 Dev's do you correct. And to be honest, if I'm just upgrading a rom to a new version I'll just wipe cache and D-cache and install without going all the way back to GB. Again, it's my understanding that really dangerous issue is wiping data. For the times I've done that (even though it is supposed to be safe in the kernels I'm using now,) I'll go back to GB. It only takes a couple of minutes to load abyss kernel, reboot recovery, wipe, and then load the new ICS rom I'm interested in trying.
And BTW, don't sell these Dev's short. Some of them are darn good, some not so much, but most are. And many are here from other devices and have a ton of experience. Plus there is something to be said for a Dev that is dedicated to and knows your device inside and out and is not working on a bunch of other stuff nor really cares about focusing on your specific device.
I got the verdict in my SGS2 0x19 --> which is known bad. Almost everyday id flashed my S2 in any way wiping data thru odin or CWM to sum up more than 100times flashing in official and custom ICS rom but nothing problem here everything goes well..
Last edited:
Similar threads
Top Liked Posts
-
There are no posts matching your filters.
-
424As you are all probably aware, the SGS2 and SGNote variants suffer from a bug that may brick your device when a certain erase method is used.
A thread with a lot of background about this issue can be found here:
http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1644364
Attached is a simple APK that reads out your chip's type and CID, and lets you know if we know that chip is dangerous or safe.
Just uninstall again after using.
Most SGS2's and Note's have "bad" chips (its actually the firmware that's bad). This is only dangerous if your kernel is dangerous as well. Gingerbread kernels are usually OK, Samsung ICS kernels are usually (bad on Note, good on SGS2 if released before July), custom ICS kernels: look in the kernel's thread. This is a simplification. See Entropy512's excellent post with some further details about which kernels are what.
Obviously, this comes "as-is", we're not responsible what you do with your device, etc. No rights can be derived from the output of the program!
Internal data used:
MAG4FA, VYL00M, or KYL00M fwrev 0x12 || 0x19 --> known bad
MAG4FA, VYL00M, or KYL00M fwrev >= 0x25 --> probably safe
MAG4FA, VYL00M, or KYL00M fwrev != 0x12 && != 0x19 && < 0x25 --> probably bad
M8G2FA, MBG8FA, MCGAFA, VAL00M, VZL00M --> probably bad (mentioned in patch code)
Everything else: unknown chip
News - 08.06.2012
Samsung: "Patches will be out in form of new official ROMs and also sourcecode releases after testing, which might take some time."
Changelog
05-09-2012 - v1.2
- Added chips mentioned in patch code ( http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=31124285&postcount=785 )
08.06.2012 - v1.1
- fwrev 0x12 is also known bad
(v1.0: 6750; v1.1: 34315)134It would be beneficial to provide more information on the brick bug to avoid some people getting unnecessarily scared (such as most I9100 users).
This bug requires three things for you to be in danger, and ALL of these conditions must be met for danger:
1) A defective eMMC chip/fwrev that is unable to handle eMMC ERASE commands (command 38) properly. (I'll provide a link with more detail on the nature of the bug later) - This condition is the one Chainfire's new app checks for. By the way, M8G2FA fwrev 0x11 (seen on some Kindle Fires) is also suspected of being defective.
2) A recovery binary that attempts to erase partitions when formatting them. Most ICS recovery binaries fit in this category, most Gingerbread recoveries do not attempt to perform an erase operation so are safe. Note that also, an affected update-binary in a ZIP could be a cause of problems too. (e.g. flashing a firmware that has an ICS update-binary and formats the partition could cause a problem even with a "safe" recovery.) So a kernel can be repacked with a "safe" CWM (such as the most recent CF-Root releases) but it will still only be partially safe.
3) A kernel that allows attempts to erase a partition to actually happen. (as opposed to reporting "not supported" and doing nothing.) - A common way of rendering a kernel safe is to remove MMC_CAP_ERASE from the capability flags in drivers/mmc/mshci.c
As of June 6, 2012, this is what I know as far as kernels that meet condition 3:
- All GT-I9100 ICS leaks and official releases prior to July 2012 are SAFE (MMC_CAP_ERASE not present)
- New GT-I9100 ICS leaks and official releases (starting in July 2012) are UNSAFE - That's right, Samsung ADDED the trigger conditions for this bug to newer releases such as XXLQ5. So much for "we're working on a fix"...
- All kernels based on GT-I9100 ICS Update4 sources are SAFE (MMC_CAP_ERASE not present) - This includes all CM9 nightlies for SGH-I777, GT-I9100, and GT-N7000, all GT-I9100 custom kernels I am aware of, and all SGH-I777 custom kernels I am aware of
- All GT-N7000 ICS leaks are UNSAFE
- All GT-N7000 ICS official kernels are UNSAFE
- All kernels built from the GT-N7000 sources are UNSAFE unless the following condition is met:
- MMC_CAP_ERASE is removed from the capability flags in drivers/mmc/host/mshci.c - check the kernel features for this. Franco.kernel R3 and later and all Speedmod ICS releases are SAFE due to this.
- All SHW-M250S/K/L ICS kernels are suspected to be UNSAFE
- All SHW-M250S/K/L ICS source releases as of this date are UNSAFE (SHW-M250L Update4 was the cause of the SiyahKernel 3.1rc6 incident. Other Siyah releases are SAFE)
- All SPH-D710 ICS releases as of this date are UNSAFE - Rumor has it that the official OTA may have a fixed kernel, but it is recommended to consider this kernel UNSAFE until source code is released and can be reviewed.
- The SGH-I777 UCLD3 leak is UNSAFE, as is most likely every other leak for that device. Fortunately nearly everyone is using I9100 Update4-based custom kernels.
- SGH-I727 and SGH-T989 ICS leaks are UNSAFE - However as these two devices use separate recovery and operational kernels, if you have a Gingerbread recovery/kernel, you should be safe regardless of what you are booting for normal operation.
It's hard to get ALL of the cases and evaluate them, but in general in terms of levels of danger (As of June 6, 2012 - this could change with time):
SPH-D710 users are in the most danger - They have no official ICS releases AND the I9100 Update4 source base can't be used to build a usable kernel for their device without major developer work
GT-N7000 users are second on the list - They are the only ones outside of Korea to receive official ICS updates that trigger the eMMC firmware defect. However, I9100 Update4 sources required only minor work to create "safe" kernels, and developers know the proper procedure for rendering the official N7000 Update3 source drop "safe"
SGH-I777 users are next - I777 leaks proved to be dangerous a month or so ago. However, the SGH-I777 required the least amount of work to be able to use the GT-I9100 Update4 source base, and as a result, with the exception of the leaks themselves, nearly all I777 ICS kernels are based off of safe source code bases.
GT-I9100 users are in the least danger - No leak, official binary release, or source code release for this device has been dangerous. Only one I9100 kernel has ever proven dangerous and that was quickly pulled by its developer.
I am not evaluating the SHW-M250S/K/L in the above list, as while I know their source and binaries are dangerous, the language/culture barrier means we have very little information on how this fiasco is panning out for those users.
UPDATE:
We have at least one confirmed report of this bug occurring with KYL00M fwrev 0x12 on a Samsung Skyrocket (SGH-I727) with their ICS leak kernels
In addition, Samsung Hercules (SGH-T989) has the same fwrev and I've been told that they have observed bricks of this type with their ICS leaks
UPDATE 2:
I've received an email from a contact at Samsung who has indicated they are working on some sort of fix to be deployed to devices with an "UNSAFE" configuration listed above. I have requested that I receive an explicit list of which binary builds contain this fix, as without that I cannot know for sure which builds are fixed and which are not. Fixes are not yet deployed to affected devices.
UPDATE 3:
So much for the claims of working on a fix above... Not only have fixes not been deployed to any kernel for any device I am aware of, but Samsung added the trigger conditions to the XXLQ5 build for GT-I9100. Yes, that is correct - a device previously unaffected by this bug is now UNSAFE.23
Yeah, because *that* is going to help
We already know Samsung is working on this. We know how to fix the problem in custom kernels. We know Samsung replaces devices that are bricked this way.
Also, technically the chip isn't faulty, the chip's firmware is faulty. The problem is that updating the firmware on those chips is a really nasty affair you really don't want end-users to be doing, unless it has gone through some very rigorous testing.
What possible use would it be to exchange all the Note's out there with new models with fixed firmwares, if they can just as well release a software update (that we know they are working on) that accomplishes the same thing ?
What exactly do you want to happen here, aside from wasting a metric ****ton of Samsung's money, which we'll all have to pay extra on the next device to recuperate these funds ?
This problem is something us "tweakers" need to be aware of for now, until it is fixed. Normal users will rarely if ever even run into this issue, and if they do, Samsung will replace the unit under warranty. Us tweakers have been warned, we know how to work around it, and we know a fix is coming - what could you possibly want beyond that ?18is this something you want us to run to collect the results or is it for our own information?
It is for your own information... there's no testing involved or anything, it just pulls some info from the device, and shows it on screen for you.10It's important to understand that the source of this problem is bad firmware in the eMMC chip. There is nothing technically wrong with the kernel itself. The eMMC claims to support a method of erasure that causes it to write bad data when it's used.
To achieve safety, you either fix the chip so that it supports the method it claims to properly or avoid using that method of erasure.
Cyanogenmod 9 is safe because it doesn't erase using that method. They use their own kernel built from their own source code.
Samsung ICS kernels are not safe because they call the best method the eMMC claims to support when erasing, which is bugged within the chip's firmware.
Anyone who uses the official Samsung ICS kernel or the ICS leaks of Samsung's kernel are at risk. Chainfire's kernel is risky because Chainfire uses Samsung's official kernels and adds Clockwork Mod to them at the binary level. He doesn't have source to modify to make his kernels safe. Samsung must make their kernel safe before Chainfire can release a safe one himself. What Chainfire has done is modify the recovery so that it won't ask the kernel to erase the eMMC in a potentially dangerous way, but it won't stop sources other than that recovery from asking for a potentially bricking erase operation because the kernel hasn't been modified and will still do it if asked to.
Because we know something of which versions of the eMMC chip are affected by this flaw, we can determine if a user is at risk simply by asking the chip to identify itself.
Decompiling a kernel is a completely different ball of wax. I wouldn't hold my breath for a tool that can do that and identify if your kernel is patched or not. Besides that, the source of the problem is now known with certainty and can be avoided by not flashing Samsung kernels until Samsung gets off their lazy butt and fixes theirs, or provides the code that can be used to fix the eMMC chip that is the source of all our troubles.
