yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] reinbeau:
Thread reopened

This thread will be monitored heavily. Pertinent discussion from a knowledgeable base will remain, all else will be deleted and possible infractions handed out. Don't make me do it.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nuramohammed26:
It's very good to know that this thread will not be closed because the fact of the matter is that i look forward to finding a solution at this particular thread and people like me that already BRICKED our Gnote have been keen on the progress of Entropy512 and all other DEVs that are using their precious time to solve this issue.We thank them all the same and may they find a solution ASAP
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
Bad news is that so far Samsung has been dead silent regarding providing any documentation regarding a method for repairing damaged devices. So far we've just received a proposed "solution" that none of the ERDs whom the solution was presented to felt was entirely safe given the lack of any methodology for repairing damage.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nuramohammed26:
true talk!even the Samsung Developers forum that we have been submitting our complaints have been blocked, each time i try to open it this is what i get "Sorry, this page was not found or

there has been a site error. ":confused:
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Do you think Mr. Sumrall or the AOSP team may be able to help fill in those gaps perhaps? And no response from R&D but they should have received the letter today. Maybe they too could help in that dept...

Guess they have their reasons for not giving what they had before...You would figure the had something like a ramboot/update/flash program already available...
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] senectus:
Entropy512, do you think their "fix" will be to simply remove the call from the kernel?

Or do you think it'll be a EMMc firmware mod? (is that even possible without some serious kit??)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nanoronline:
A question about Official ICS releases

I have been reading here and there all over XDA but it is very hard to find what I am wondering so I hope that it is acceptable for me to ask here since I am not spewing speculations?

1. I read this post written by Enthropy that all official ICS kernels for Galaxy Note are not safe. But does that mean it is not safe to update with any official ICS OTA (or Kies) that your Note receives?

2. If it is safe to update with the ICS OTA/Kies sent to your Galaxy Note then will be safe to flash via PC Odin, any latest official ICS ROMs as long as no wipe is carried out?

Thanks! I hope I am not breaking any rules here for asking!

P.s. I am asking this because I have recently ordered online a Galaxy Note for myself..
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
I already asked him something similar in an email I sent over a week ago, and I know you specifically asked him relevant questions. I haven't heard from him in a while.

That's what they did in the T989 kernel. Removal of MMC_CAP_ERASE just like in the I9100 sources.

So far there hasn't been any evidence of any protection measures involving fixes to the eMMC firmware, or any evidence of us getting a way to actually FIX the problem (I consider "repair of a damaged device" to be a fix. We've had protection measures since before the portal posting that started this thread.)

I feel kind of sorry for one of the contacts I have at Samsung - I believe they're stuck in between their management and a bunch of angry ERDs...
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
I hope Entropy will correct me if I'm wrong, but here's the summary:

If you're going to upgrade to ICS just know you shouldn't wipe or factory reset from it at the moment. If you think you're going to need to, get a copy of the GB build so you can flash it via ODIN.

If you're looking into other ROMs, you must flash from a GB kernel. Same with CWM restores or any other function that could involve a format/wipe.

Reason being is that the GB kernel didn't contain the code; unmodified ICS code does and enables the offending function.

Since I don't have a Note I'll leave it to others to specify if and what kernels have been modified and determined as "safe". I'd rather err on the side of caution than give you bad info and have a potential brick on my hands.

And as long as you take precautions and follow that one rule - ICS will do what you need. If you're not certain or don't want the risk then I'll suggest staying on GB until you're ready.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] panyan:
so potentially the "fix" from samsung could effectively just be what we have now with chainfires 5.6 kernel and an updated rom to avoid MMC_CAP_ERASE?

if so, wouldnt we just do that now ourselves? :)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nanoronline:
Thanks for the reply!

I just want to get official stock ICS, no plans on doing wipe or getting custom ROMs. I am bothered by this brickbug because I also helped my sister to purchase a Note online which would be some European stock so I was thinking of flashing an official ICS firmware for Singapore (where she is currently working at) via PC Odin before passing the Note to her.

The phones are not here yet for another couple of days so I shall wait and see what others say about this then.

---------- Post added at 02:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 AM ----------

According to Chainfire's post here the problem lies with Samsung's stock kernels. His root is just a modification of that stock kernel. So it still has to be fixed by Samsung is what I take it to mean.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nuramohammed26:
Yes......What you said make Sense.......
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] jgaviota:
If you are installing pure stock ICS then:

1) If she does not wipe she is ok.

2) If she wipes on stock ICS kernel and stock ICS recovery it doesn't matter what method she uses to initiate the wipe, there is a VERY SMALL BUT NON ZERO CHANCE that she'll brick, the only solution for her would be to take her device to a repair center, and the Note not being local would most probably mean that she would cover the cost of the new board. She would most probably not brick though.

3) She can safely install OTAs and/or KIES upgrades because those do not wipe.

4) If she starts installing random kernels, custom roms or wiping more often than not, then all bets are off. The only safe way to do this is installing a GB or a known safe (Speedmod or Franco) kernel.

5) Most bricks on the Note are from people who are not careful when they install roms through CWM or they wipe from non stock CWM on unsafe kernels. Bricks can also happen (and they have happened) with people wiping from stock unmodified kernels.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] PoisonWolf:
It's already being done this way for several kernels. This includes Entropy's DAFUQ kernel, CM9 kernels, etc. Just read up and the OP's kernel post should tell you if they've removed the MMC_ERASE command.

Just know that this is not a fool-proof solution as some update-packages (i.e., .zip files in CWM) can still include the erase command and kill your phone.

If you really want to be safe, stay with CM9. With the recent inclusion of some 20ms delayed timer when waking the phone, most users should not experience any further SODs which should make it close, if not already, an awesome daily driver.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] jgaviota:
If the kernel removes MMC_CAP_ERASE (Dafuq, Speedmod, Franco, CM9) then files from CWM cannot trigger an erase.

The problem lies with repackaged stock kernels, like Chainfire's CF-Root 5.6

Those are only partially safe, they are safe for wiping, but you have to be extra careful because a format with an unsafe update-binary can brick the device.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] PoisonWolf:
Thanks for clarifying that, I wasn't too sure about that and wanted to err on the side that got the person to not randomly flash CWM .zip files just to be extra cautious.

Still, good to know! So you're saying that if I'm on CM9 and I flash a .zip which calls for the erase command, it effectively does nothing?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
Correct.

Removing MMC_CAP_ERASE from mshci.c ensures that no ERASE commands reach the eMMC chip even if recovery or an update-binary in a ZIP tries to issue them.

CF-Root 5.6 has a recovery that doesn't send ERASE, but a kernel that still allows ERASE commands through (as it's a samsung binary, it can't be altered to fix this.)

Recent CM9 nightly zips SHOULD be safe to flash because the update-binary has been rendered safe, but I haven't fully tested this yet.

Anything flashed from DAFUQ, Speedmod, Franco R3 and later, or the official CM9 kernel should be safe as these kernels all block erase commands. Same with any future kernel that removes MMC_CAP_ERASE from mshci.c
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] WesleyR:
Hi Entropy512

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but would we be "safe" if we had Goku Kernel with Chainfire's version of CWM 5.5? I see in the Goku kernel thread he mentions that he will be including Chainfire's version of CWM 5.5 which is a "safe" recovery, then with the "safe" kernel which should be covered in 2 areas?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] senectus:
thanks for the clarification.

Its understandable that the solution would be so simplistic and half arsed, but also disappointing.

I mean the Dev's here have already shown that its easy and simple to do that, so why the hell hasn't Samsung/telco's mobilized and done it already.

I'm not asking you mate, I'm just raging at the slow turning circle of a leviathan like Samsung.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nanoronline:
It depends on what the kernel is based on. If it is based on ICS Update4 sources then it is safe, not what recovery mode is used. Read Enthropy512's post here that says so.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
No clue what that kernel is. If it's source-built, it should be rendered safe in source via removal of MMC_CAP_ERASE from mshci.c (which has been discussed all over). If it's a repack - why is he bothering to do his own stock repack?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] qtekdude:
What about the Nordic rom launched today. Is there a fix in place? I have it on my phone, and can check if anyone tells me how.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
Assume not. I'm going to assume that all kernels are dangerous going forward unless Samsung explicitly tells me which builds have what fixes.

Right now:

All Samsung kernels for N7000 are dangerous or Samsung is violating the GPL, as no safe source has been posted. Even after source is posted, I will consider kernels to be dangerous unless Samsung explicitly states, for each build, that they were built from the safe source. (I stated this to our new Samsung contact in my first email to them.) I don't have enough confidence in Samsung's quality control/configuration management process to assume safety without explicit statements of safety for each build until we have a way of repairing damage (which we don't and we have not had a single peep from Samsung that this will change.)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] zaheerjk:
I am from Kuwait ..

I purchased Samsung galaxy Note N7000 15 Days before

I have Installed King Droid ICS mania 2.1 later yesterday i updated to King droid ICS mania 3.0 and Samsung galaxy s3 Mod updated .. after that i restarted my NOTE but its not booting

i can go to Download mode and Recovery mode ..

even i can see the Install ZIP from SD card and all in CW ..when i Update it says

Can't Mount EMMC

I tried to Mount also But failure ..

I tried Stock rom of ICS official to Update Using ODIN 1.85 .. it stops at

<ID:0/008> factoryfs.img ..

I am worried I cant go for warranty Bcoz at Boot It says Binary count (5)

Please Help me Out
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] garwynn:
Does a USB jig work to solve this like it does for the Epic 4G Touch (Galaxy SII variant)? If so this may solve your problem of resetting the binary count.

And have you tried a stock GB by ODIN - figure it can't hurt to try that as well.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] praetorius:
if all else fails, hardbrick the device using angelom kernel and claim your warranty.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] jonpaslim:
You can try this if you have a jig. http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1354888&highlight=triangle+away
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] 1username4thisforum:
I have an I9100M, I rooted it, and installed cwm from an update zip that does not use in insecure kernel, did a stock wipe from recovery, reboot and dead.

No jig to try download mode, but nothing happens with the device powering on, or doing key presses.

What should I do with the phone?

I bought it used, so no warranty, and I assume samsung service would charge me more then I can get a new board with some $ back for my bricked board off ebay. Would that be the best route?

edit: fwiw: I did buy another 2s, and rooted it and put an old recovery from my previous(when they first came out) galaxy s2 with villain rom 3.0 i9100xxki3 2.6.35.7-i9100xxk13-cl577579

se.infra@sep-55 #2 the got brickbug app confirms this s2 has the 19 chip with bad firmware. Am I safe with what I'm running now?

Should I just save the other for parts if I plan on keeping this phone for a while?

Not happy the canada version of s3 is still dual core with lte, and I have smaller hands so the s2 is perfect.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
That's odd because only SiyahKernel 3.1rc6 for I9100 is dangerous. All other kernels (including all other Siyah releases) are safe.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] jenizaro:
Is it impossible to port safe SGS2 kernels to SGN? I dont have knowledge about it sorry if its a stupid question :)
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] :
Gokhanmoral said that minor changes need to be done to siyah to work with Note! :/
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
We already know how to render a kernel safe when we have source, and part of the solution came from looking at the I9100 source.

Oh, and what do you think the CM9 kernel is along with DAFUQ?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
I'd be interested to see what he did to fix FIMC/MFC when running Note firmwares on I9100 sources. Pulling in the N7000 FIMC/MFC drivers is easier said than done.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] 1username4thisforum:
Well, I can guarantee you I fully bricked a galaxy s2 I9100M using the root without an insecure kernel method.

I would assume the problem came from doing a factory erase while in touch recovery after installing the root zip.

---------- Post added at 04:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 PM ----------

I posted about it in the thread where I downloaded the files to root.

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=27130449&postcount=342

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1501719&page=7
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] :
I wish i had the knowlegde to make siyah happen on Note :(
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] MohElShafei:
Is there any news regarding to the promise SAMSUNG give to release the fix soon?

I saw this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0SX3iDuIZc

I don't know if this method will fix the bricked devices or not.

Thanks.

Mohamed

---------- Post added at 05:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:38 AM ----------

What about this solution .. is this will work for the bricked devices?

http://mobiletechvideos.mybigcommerce.com/samsung-galaxy-note-jtag-brick-repair/

Thanks.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] prasad.adam:
No, JTAG cannot restore eMMC bricked devices.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
Just because you killed your bootloader doesn't mean that you encountered THIS issue discussed in this thread. You have so far provided zero evidence to indicate that you are actually suffering from this issue. You still haven't even stated which build's kernel you wiped from. No I9100 stock kernel is known to be able to trigger this bug. In fact, any one that matches the I9100 Update4 source code is completely and totally incapable of triggering the bug. (e.g. either Samsung is violating the GPL or all of their I9100 kernels are safe) If you bricked, it was due to some other issue than this one.

Unlike those who have actually suffered eMMC damage, you may be able to successfully have the device repaired using JTAG.

No, it's long been established that JTAG repair can't fix these bricks. This is the reason I began naming it "Superbrick" - it's the first time in history any bricks have occurred on our devices that weren't recoverable using JTAG.

Samsung's definition of "fix" so far seems to be providing a configuration that doesn't cause damage in the first place. It is still unknown what solution they will deploy for this device - on I9100 and T989, it was removal of MMC_CAP_ERASE. A number of us (those in contact with Samsung regarding this issue) are still pushing for them to work with us on developing a repair methodology.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] sangalaviral:
Entropy there is a new kernel in the LPA build for indian users.

Build date is june 12th.

Can you somehow possibly check is it safe?

And

Can We conclude that a custom kernel with MMC_CAP_ERASE disabled with the new recovery that chainfire created which also renders wipe from the recovery safe,

Can we assume that emmc bug cant be the reason for brick with this kernel?

And if the update binary with format command will not harm the chip with above kernel?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] 1username4thisforum:
This is what happened.

I bought a used Galaxy s2 loaded with stock UKG2

used kies to update to Bell official ICS

used the files from here installed the touch cwm, then installed root/busybox, format from within cwm and there is no response. No lights, no screen, no download mode, nothing.

I assumed it was the EMMC bug, and someone also said the same thing in that thread.

Cheapest Jtag I found was $100 including return shipping in canada.

Or I seen new motherboards on ebay for $100, and they have up to a 40-50$ rebate for a bricked/water damaged board...

Edit: is it possible one of the files from that thread made the format call or whatever to trigger the emmc bug? And if it is not those files, then how does the bootloader randomly get erased?

I'm not unsure of what I can/cannot do with my other currently working SGS2 with known bad EMMC chip. Current running Villainrom3.0 2.6.35.7-i9100xxk13-cl577579 se.infra@sep-55 #2

Not sure what operations/actions are unsafe to be doing.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
No, it is not possible to check if a binary kernel is safe. Assume they are dangerous until proven otherwise. (I said something along these lines in my first email to my new contact at Samsung - I will not trust any kernel unless it's explicitly stated as containing the fix or there is a good way to verify that a fix is in place.) Currently, it is not possible for an N7000 ICS kernel to be safe without Samsung violating the GPL, as we only have one N7000 source release and that is dangerous.

Removal of MMC_CAP_ERASE alone (with no need to change recovery or update-binaries) is enough to ensure safety. In CM9, we've been setting BOARD_SUPPRESS_EMMC_WIPE on affected boards as a redundant safety measure (which causes built update-binaries and recoveries to be safe), but that setting is redundant on kernels that have MMC_CAP_ERASE set. I primarily enabled it to allow CM9 to be safer to flash on dangerous kernels (although I still need to do some verification work before the official CM9 install instructions change.)

If a kernel has MMC_CAP_ERASE properly removed, it should not be possible to trigger eMMC damage with such a kernel - 3 months of operation (more if you count leaks) of that configuration in the I9100 community proves this. I9100 kernels all have MMC_CAP_ERASE removed except for Siyah 3.1rc6 - As a result, the only I9100 users affected by the eMMC bug are those that flashed that one Siyah release (which was pulled within 1-2 days - all other Siyah releases are safe).

The only incident I saw of someone having eMMC damage trigger after flashing a kernel with MMC_CAP_ERASE disabled was one person who claimed to have damage with Franco R3 with Mobile Odin. The problems are:

1) There have been a number of people indicating that MO sometimes fails to flash kernels - the user in question dropped immediately into recovery after flashing without verifying that the kernel flashed properly.

2) Franco's kernels are packaged as CWM-flashable zips - if the user flashed the kernel with MO, they had to have manually extracted the zImage from the zip. It's easy at this point to choose the wrong zImage - I've done it MANY times.

I'm in contact with just one person at Samsung. I kind of feel sorry for them, as I get a sense they're stuck in between XDA and their management...
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Pika007:
Feeling sorry for them?

While i can see where you're coming from, i think we deserve an OS update that won't endanger our expensive devices, these certainly aren't a dollar a dozen goods.

from past experience with samsung (S1, S2) i can't say i'm overly optimistic, they announced they're working on it more than 2 weeks ago, and went dark.

If anyone knows anything, feel free to share...
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] musashiro:
i cannot agree more.. every time that i'm having urges to flash ICS, i am like "my phone is awesome and obviously expensive. it deserves a nearly flawless OS"

i received this awesome phone as a gift and i CAN'T afford to have a bricked phone...

hoping for a fix soon
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nuramohammed26:
I hope Samsung is aware of their Success in the mobile Arena is because of how easy and comfortable it's for everyone to easily flash all sort and manner of custom Roms on the Galaxy Series...... If by default I and so many others like me will not be confident to flash different Roms on the Gnote(fear of eMMC) then the whole idea of the ANDROID EXPERIENCE is defeated
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nandihno:
The op should change the title of the thread from soon to maybe

Just saying ...
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] shantanubarik:
Guyes indian ics for galaxy note got first update with new karnel dated 12 june. Is it eMMC bug fixed karnel?. Please find the attached screenshot for my updated karnel .
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nuramohammed26:
I totally agree with you:D
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] RoyaL:
Some people says that this update didn't change anything in the eMMC firmware so...

But let's wait for the devs.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] nuramohammed26:
You should not rush to brick your Gnote cos if Samsung are pushing updates with safe kernels then they should make it clear in written that they have rectify the eMMC bug.....
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] krazman325:
Entropy512 gave a very good answer to this question 1 or 2 pages back from your post. Perhaps you should read at least a little bit of this thread before you post redundant questions which, then, trigger redundant answers!

kraz

EDIT: SEE POST #268 IF YOU'RE TOO LAZY TO SEARCH FOR YOURSELF.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] sangalaviral:
Thats correct entropy512 promptly amswered my query in the best possible way just few post back
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] MohElShafei:
I have no hope that SAMSUNG will fix any already bricked devices (with damaged eMMC) .. I believe the only solution is to replace the Motherboard.. I just don't know its price, does anyone know the cost of replacing the Motherboard at any SAMSUNG Service Center?
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] :
From what i have been told the two times i went to one, from 300€ to 400€! Not sure of it's price thought because no one knew the right price of it!

If you have warranty, then it's free! :D
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] Entropy512:
The last email AdamOutler received from our contact hinted that they might finally be starting to consider working with us on a fix for damaged devices.

Unfortunately the language barrier is becoming more and more evident as things go forward... There are definite language/cultural barriers that need to be overcome as a part of this process.
[Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General] M3TALLICA:
That really is a great news.

Btw is it possible to upgrade the eMMC firmware with ota / kies (and possibly by odin) updates ? This would fix the bug permanently, wouldn't it ?