yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] chasmodo:
Look, guys, it's extremely hard to tell what exactly caused my Note to brick up.

Maybe all my Repack Rom hopping made it wonky, and LPY was the proverbial

straw that broke the camel's back?

Maybe LPY contains some bug that affects one Note in a thousand? Ten thousand?

I certainly don't think CM9 is to blame. If the kernel is 100% pukka, not a single Rom

could cause a hard-brick.

Anyway, I wouldn't start a panicky retreat to GB if I were you.

Use your phones cautiously, though: don't start flashing custom Roms left, right

and center when they emerge. Also, don't use your CWMR if you don't have to,

just in case. And check the fora regularly to see if there are any more bricks.

Then decide what to do.

I sincerely hope I'm the first and the last victim of LPY.:)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] k1ng617:
He wasn't on a chinese leaked kernel, he was on official CM9 kernel.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] dereknas:
i think there's a difference in flashing.

chas was already on cm9 and decided just to flash the kernel only.

whereas your case you flashed the full lpy rom package from cm9 over cm9.

my case was similar to yours but i flashed the rom and cf lpy root kernel all at one go without wipe in mo, but could not get pass the boot screen after which a complete wipe in cwm solved the problem.

but i guess i won't be flashing anything in cwm yet until it is confirmed safe.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] chasmodo:
I was on officiele™ CM9, Bobby, not Chinese...ahem...as you so eloquently put it.;)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] GocaS6:
We're really unlucky with this hardbricking and all crap i mean how long will this go on? This is getting ridiculous :(...
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
I think the difference was: Most people wiped when flashing LPY, and when they wiped, they were still on an old "safe" kernel.

In Chas's case - he forgot to wipe initially, so went and wiped using the LPY kernel.

Wiping (and anything that incurs a wipe/format, which includes flashing full firmware packages and Nandroid restores) seems to be the most dangerous operation - it's the same deal over in the Epic 4G Touch forums - wipes are the killer.

And as stated in the sticky - this may only affect a small percentage of users - maybe 2%, maybe 5%, maybe 10%. That's why some people have been able to safely wipe with affected kernels in the past. It's the same over in the E4GT forums - some people wiped 10 times and problems showed up on the 11th.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
i guess i will just use the phone normally, no flash, no wipes.. just a regular phone(the main reason for buying the phone) and wait till clarifications arise..

since Chainfire also uses the words "might", "appears" and others that certainly tell that he isn't sure as well...

lets wait for more clarifications....

for me if its an OTA update.. it means that its fully polished.. the main reason why i used it instead of custom roms and sh*tty leaks..
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] fl4r3:
Interesting....did you try again but making sure there were no mistakes (so you definitely typed "hwrev", "fwrev", oemid" etc) and you gave superuser access?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
yeah did it again... is this bad?? im on GB rom...:(
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
Yes, you were lucky. How lucky, we don't know. Only 5% of users might brick (we don't know, and getting good data means sacrificing many devices - we don't want to do that!) - but that's a LOT higher than the 0% for safe kernels. What we do know is that prior to ICS leaks, reports of hardbricks were rare and almost always the result of users doing something really stupid. With Note ICS leaks and the official XXLPY release, we have floods of users who are hardbricking or getting damaged unusable partitions, multiple people each day. Seriously, in the I777 community, in just one day UCLD3 killed more people's hardware than the entire history of I777 development since October. I suspect the same statistic is here - XXLPY is killing more devices per day than the entire history of N7000 development prior to ICS leaks appearing. Yeah, plenty of people have survived - but telling people they are safe because you were safe is like telling people that having sex with a different stranger every day without a condom for a year is safe because you managed to not get HIV.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
hey entropy, why cant i open data when i do the cat data ?? is that bad??
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] fl4r3:
I'm not sure, if you've definitely typed it right and given it SU access then I don't know.

EDIT: solved, was a misspelt command.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
delete
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] copperdawgnc:
Hereugo

127|app_37@android:/ $ su

app_37@android:/ # cd /sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device

app_37@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

02/2012

MMC

0x0d7f3931

app_37@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat cid

15010056594c30304d190d7f39312fe5

app_37@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device #
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
silly mistake its date not data...:)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] copperdawgnc:
How can we log the brick history of Samsung Devices on ICS?

Do we know if certain build dates or location is a factor
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Thanks to everyone who has already posted, this is giving a much clearer picture!
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] gloschi:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

01/2012

MMC

0x47dd79f9

15010056594c30304d1947dd79f91f53
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
thank you for investigating....

please post your eMMC CID.. thanks...
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] EdgaBimbam:
btw is it possible to check via terminal emulator on the phone? same commands as for adb?

edit it works, here is mine:

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

02/2012

MMC

0x3a211d71
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Dezmatch:
My device

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

11/2011

MMC

0x6cee4161

Good luck ;)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] EdgaBimbam:
hmmm would be interesting to see ,ofc if is it possible, the bricked phones emmc cid data
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] jkq:
$ cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

02/2012

MMC

0x293174e3

$ cat cid

15010056594c30304d19293174e32fb5

Hope it helps!

Sent from my GT-N7000
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] spacetaxi:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

10/2011

MMC

0xae5e7f7b

15010056594c30304d19ae5e7f7bae2b
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] djtiny:
app_186@android:/ $ export PATH=/data/local/bin:$PATH

app_186@android:/ $ su

app_186@android:/ # cd /sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device

e hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial <

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x373d5781

app_186@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat cid

15010056594c30304d19373d57819e4d

app_186@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device #
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Mautflucht:
My Note:

cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x6c17667b

cat cid

15010056594c30304d196c17667b9e9f
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] ngocdao:
app_218@android:/ $ export PATH=/data/local/bin:$PATH

app_218@android:/ $ su

app_218@android:/ # cd /sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device

e hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial <

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0xbb192463

app_218@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat did

did: No such file or directory

1|app_218@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat cid

15010056594c30304d19bb1924639e1d

app_218@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device #

This reminds me of the Y2K scare. Everybody went out buying like 10 cases of water. Or began constructing underground shelters. People were fighting for canned food at the store.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] MR.change:
I'm currently on CM9 ,and you know that the mount points are different for AOSP ROMs

when I type :

cd /sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device

in the terminal ,it gives error directory not found

same if I try :

cd /sys/class/block/mmcblk1/device

any idea on how I can get you that CID ?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
its advisable that you do it on GB or ICS... :D
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Yucko:
Here 'ya go!

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x00015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x79d760d9

15010056594c30304c1979c760c99ee1
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] MR.change:
oh well ,too lazy to revert back to GB just to give my CID date ,sorry but I'm sitting on the sidelines for this one

if there is a way to do it from CM9 (which I'm sure there is) then I'm more than happy to help

good luck with your investigation BTW.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] omigosh:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

12/2011

MMC

0xe1a95b79

15010056594c30304d19e1a95b79ce65
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] :
# cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial cid

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x5c926c4d

15010056594c30304d195c926c4d9edb

#
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] kurogane_s:
root@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial cid

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

01/2012

MMC

0x6c4b06da

15010056594c30304d196c4b06da1f2b

This is from a Serbian-originated Note.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] xelir13:
Here is Mine:

# cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

08/2011

MMC

0x70c6755e

# cat cid

15010056594c30304d1970c6755e8ec5

#
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] debernardis:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x53930eb5

15010056594c30304d1953930eb59ed1
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Nemesis_00:
Output:

VYL00M
0x0
0x0
0x000015
0x0100
10/2011
MMC
0xd0a07a40
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] seltaeb:
Here's the output for my device, hope it helps:

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x9cba2a95

15010056594c30304d199cba2a959e21
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] lanyao1920:
My result:
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] REVERSiN:
You better make a count for release date seems many have the old 2011

Here is mine..

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

01/2012

MMC

0xd5ff1235
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] mfractal:
Looks like we all got the same exact chip and revision though....
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] alias_neo:
Same details for mine except it's 09/2011
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] djtiny:
Hi Guys,

Would you be shedding any light on what your looking at and the fix you may have with the date that myself and over xda'rs have provided you with. What are the trends besides the chip being the same but manufacturing date being different.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] :
root@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid

date type serial

wrev manfid oemid date type serial <

root@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat cid
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] batterylife:
cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oemid date type serial

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

02/12

MMC

0xce0c6575

cat cid

15010056594c30304d19ce0c65752f8d
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] fl4r3:
I think people need to make sure they also do "cat cid" as I think Garwynn is also looking at the numbers just before the serial (highlighted in red in my output I posted earlier).
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] joe2316:
Hold on, I'm still in my Y2K emergency bunker...you mean it's safe to come out???
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Sine.:
^ lol

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

02/2012

MMC

0x08e872a1

15010056594c30304d1908e872a12f41

See here : Discussion thread for /data EMMC corruption bug
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
It's a long discussion but here's the thread with our discussion of it:

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1644364

It started when we saw something a little unexpected - the Epic 4G Touch test builds of ICS jumped from 4.0.3 to 4.0.4. Naturally curiosity got the best of me and so I started looking at the changelog - that's when we found this.

Since it's only in 4.0.4_r1.1 and higher it may explain why ICS has taken so long to get out to devices. Why push it out if you know there's a prevalent bug out there? It seems prudent to fix that first and then push out a stable release.

---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:34 PM ----------

Thanks to all that posted the results - I think I've got enough results now. I'll pass the results on and hopefully this will help them fix this problem!

If anyone should find though that they have 2 characters other than 19 in that cid string, please post it here.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Master_Unit:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

01/2012

MMC

0xd23e4dfd

@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat cid

15010056594c30304d19d23e4dfd1f8b
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
The thing is:

1) Vendor kernel trees are almost NEVER synced to AOSP - it's frequent that Samsung kernels for non-Nexus devices are missing patches present in AOSP kernel trees for Nexus devices

2) The failure mode described for that bug is different from ours - the failure mode in question wouldn't cause eMMC blocks to become unwritable.

3) It's a fix for the Galaxy Nexus, which never encountered this particular bug, which is more evidence that the patch in 4.0.4 is unrelated to Superbrick

(and as I understand it - your latest releases are still exhibiting Superbrick behavior)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] jgaviota:
VYLOOM

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

02/2012

MMC

0x149c5998

15010056594c30304d19149c59982f53

---------- Post added at 04:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:12 PM ----------

What I think is happening is that the information about the partitions is being corrupted by the format, in a way that cannot easily be recovered.

As far as I can see ALL the bricks resulted from a format, either via a wipe from recovery or from the install script of Stunner.

Was there any change in the way a format is made from a GB kernel to an ICS one?

If the partition info that gets corrupted is from a partition that does not hold the pbl or sbl then the phone can get into download mode or recovery, but if the partition info that gets corrupted is for any of those two then you have a black screen hard brick.

Has anyone that has a bootloop brick (where you can still go into Download mode) tried repartitioning from latest Heimdall from Linux?

If it is not the partition info it's something like that, maybe some kind of access table...

Anyone has any technical info on the emmc chip used here, and how the partitions are stored? Also any info on the booting process for our exynos? Has AdamOutler made an UnbrickableMod for any of the afflicted devices?

An UnbrickableMod could help us by giving lower level access to the boot process.

BTW I'm an electronics engineer, but I don't have access to the documentation, or to the right tools, and also I don't have the soldering skills to try to develope an UnbrickableMod.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] tbong777:
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]

Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\Tom>cd \android-sdk-windows\platform-tools

C:\android-sdk-windows\platform-tools>adb shell

root@android:/ # su

su

root@android:/ # cd /sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device

cd /sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device

root@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat name hwrev fwrev manfid oe

date type serial

wrev manfid oemid date type serial

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x15584faf

root@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat cid

cat cid

15010056594c30304d1915584faf9edd
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] blitzkriegh:
Anyone here experienced pixel salad bug in lpy rom?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] ngocdao:
Not til 2012 is over.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] rathian:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

03/2012

MMC

0x2cc574a3

15010056594c30304d192cc574a33f8f
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] carabao72:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

09/2011

MMC

0x393d5294

15010056594c30304d19393d52949e69
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] 1ndroid:
VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

01/2012

MMC

0x2ce05d43

cat cid

15010056594c30304d192ce05d431f41
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] mikhil92:
ICS

Well... ive used Ics for a week now...

it runs perfect.. but am juz not satisfied with ICS itself.. too much battery drain n phone gets heated way too easily... wud suggest ppl to go back to GB
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] prabhu1980:
Hi All,

I feel this emmc bug is more related to partitioning rather than frying up of EMMC.

I hate to listen the idea of frying. I have never fried up my harddisks earlier.

I m looking for a solid proof of frying ...

a) All posts says maybe a bug in emmc driver, might have fried up emmc.

b) 32kb of zeroes ... Insert and Prove it Boss.

I am tired and sick of listening to hardware issues because I have fried up my harddisks earlier with bad boot sectors due to injuries and I have restarted 100% because there were many users who fried their memory disks.

Now a few users have replaced their MoBo too fast I would say.

(Please understand I know the pain of loss - I may be the first to change the Galaxy Note Mobo - Mar '12 - LP1 bug)

How many are there to backup this theory ???

Please dont hate me because I am having a different theory.

I have some queries which I would like to discuss.

I am no one close to even a Low level developer. But believe me I am logical .

Epic4g forums are discussing the bug very close to this manner.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Braxos:
Hmm so it was lp1 thought it was la1. Good to know I wasn't along on it, took a month to get a 100% functional phone back from service. Pathetic simple.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Richy99:
litigation for what? people using modified kernels then having devices brick?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] PoisonWolf:
Litigation that the stock kernel is exhibiting the superbrick bug when the phone is under heavy i/o load (see stickied topic). Thus, wiping the phone even from the phone's stock recovery, or even resetting it via settings USING stock kernel for ICS can result in the phone superbricking.

In my mind, that's definitely justified insofar that folks are not allowed to get their motherboards replaced free-of-charge.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Update

Ken Sumrall from Android has gotten back to us with a lot of good information on the Superbrick. More coming soon on the Epic 4G Touch thread that I linked before - I'll repost here immediately after.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] E90 Commie:
It seems to be a problem even with the new LPF and that is based on this post:

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=26250694&postcount=411

It seems like a data wipe was performed on the LPF kernel and it resulted in the "Classic Samsung ICS Superbrick".

I really hope they release the kernel sources soon so this problem can get a permanent solution.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Zilpzalp21:
Guys, I've got a question.

I live in Germany and I've just installed the official ICS version over the air (4.0.3, LPY kernel). I have always been on stock roms before and have zero experiences in flashing custom roms whatsoever, but I have never been really content with some things about TouchWiz, so I decided to change to custom roms if Samsung's ICS does not suit my taste as well, which is the case.

Because of that and because of the issues with LPY, I decided I want to go back to gingerbread and go to Cyanogenmod9 or something else (do not really now anything about those, will just have to try them all out).

Since my English is not too great, and since I felt noone straight out answered this question, I want to make sure that I got this right.

First, wiping is not safe on LPY. Recovery mode is not either. Also, this so-called 'CWM' is dangerous as well.

1) From how I understood things, for flashing to other, custom roms, one uses either CWM or Odin. Is this correct?

2) CWM should not be used with LPY, while Odin seems to have no issues with LPY (at least none we know of), is this true?

3) Therefore, I could use Odin without issues, right? I know that noone can guarantee that nothing will happen, but I want to take the safest option.

4) It seems there are two versions of Odion, one for your device and one for your computer. Which one should I use?

5) How exactly do I flash roms with Odin anyway? I find it a bit hard to cope with the xda-forums, every thread name seems so bloated to me, making it really hard for me to find what I am looking for, so I could not really find a guide for that up until now.

Thanks in advance.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] copperdawgnc:
Entopy has a safe kernel that you can flash with pc odin http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1617981 download the tar file
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Drakosha:
Great detailed info, at last. Can you please specify, if this bug affects firmware 0x0 as well? Or may be we get "0x0" version just because "the file /sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device/fwrev was not initialized from the CID for emmc devices rev 4 and greater, and thus showed zero", so what is the actual firmware version then?

Mine is

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

08\2011

Is it 0x0, 0x19 or 0x25 after all? :)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Very likely 0x19. You can confirm though by doing a cat serial and cat cid. Look for the serial (without the 0x) and check the 2 characters immediately to the left of the serial in the cid string.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Drakosha:
fwrev manfid oemid date type serial

VYL00M

0x0

0x0

0x000015

0x0100

08/2011

MMC

0xd295762a

shell@android:/sys/class/block/mmcblk0/device # cat cid

cat cid

15010056594c30304d19d295762a8e63

Strange, but I don't see anything resembling 19 or 25 at all... :(
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Drop the 0x and look for d295762a. I highlighted it in blue.

Take the two chars to the left. That's what they're using for fwrev in the fix.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Sine.:
Edit : BBQed by garwynn :p

And thx for the update btw!
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
Thanks for the update. I will quote the post on the OP when I am on my Laptop.

Can we expect a patch for 0x19??
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
The patch is already developed - the question is whether Samsung will release it to the public. Mr. Sumrall stated he will ask on our behalf - I'll pass on what he sends to me as I have been.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] fl4r3:
Excellent work, its great to see things being confirmed (erase command causing problems) and the fact that Samsung has a patch.

Thanks for the updates, looking forward to see what else you hear back.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
Sorry forgot that he said "I will ask about it"

Hopefully the fix is absolute.

He said the fix will wipe the chip, is that OK with nonbricked devices??

Sent from me
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Actually there are 2 bugs with our eMMC - and apparently the others at revision 0x19 as he mentions this was a controller fw update. (Makes sense that they may use the same embedded controller over multiple devices.) Patching the "superbrick" bug will still leave us vulnerable to the second - the code patch can avoid that one.

If you want I can ask him about the GB question as sfhub also is curious. And now I'll take my slice of humble pie... :)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] prabhu1980:
Dear Mr Garwyn

There are many users who have bricked their phone and stuck at factoryfs.img.

Can you support them now?

Else many are planning to endup changing their mother boards.

PLEASE HELP.....
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Not yet... but stay tuned.

Out of curiosity, how many people out there (if any) are on an official ICS build now?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
I'm far less worried about bug #2 (the one that got patched in AOSP). It can be recovered from using a format, making it potentially "annoying but not scary". Bug #1 is the scary one.

Before asking him about GB let me take another look at the code - now that I know what I'm looking for I may find something I missed before. (BTW, check PMs.)