The present invention relates generally to memory devices, and particularly to methods and systems for data storage in memory devices having erase failures.
Several types of memory devices, such as Flash memories, use arrays of analog memory cells for storing data. Each analog memory cell stores a quantity of an analog value, also referred to as a storage value, such as an electrical charge or voltage. The storage value represents the information stored in the cell. In Flash memories, for example, each analog memory cell holds a certain amount of electrical charge. The range of possible analog values is typically divided into regions, each region corresponding to a combination of one or more data bit values that may be stored in a given cell. Data is written to an analog memory cell by writing a nominal analog value that corresponds to the desired bit or bits.
Some memory devices, which are commonly referred to as Single-Level Cell (SLC) devices, store a single bit of information in each memory cell, i.e., each memory cell can be programmed to assume two possible memory states. Higher-density devices, often referred to as Multi-Level Cell (MLC) devices, store two or more bits per memory cell, i.e., can be programmed to assume more than two possible memory states.
Flash memory devices are described, for example, by Bez et al., in “Introduction to Flash Memory,” Proceedings of the IEEE, volume 91, number 4, April, 2003, pages 489-502, which is incorporated herein by reference. Multi-level Flash cells and devices are described, for example, by Eitan et al., in “Multilevel Flash Cells and their Trade-Offs,” Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM), New York, N.Y., pages 169-172, which is incorporated herein by reference. The paper compares several kinds of multilevel Flash cells, such as common ground, DINOR, AND, NOR and NAND cells.
Eitan et al., describe another type of analog memory cell called Nitride Read Only Memory (NROM) in “Can NROM, a 2-bit, Trapping Storage NVM Cell, Give a Real Challenge to Floating Gate Cells?” Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Solid State Devices and Materials (SSDM), Tokyo, Japan, Sep. 21-24, 1999, pages 522-524, which is incorporated herein by reference. NROM cells are also described by Maayan et al., in “A 512 Mb NROM Flash Data Storage Memory with 8 MB/s Data Rate”, Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference (ISSCC 2002), San Francisco, Calif., Feb. 3-7, 2002, pages 100-101, which is incorporated herein by reference. Other exemplary types of analog memory cells are Floating Gate (FG) cells, Ferroelectric RAM (FRAM) cells, magnetic RAM (MRAM) cells, Charge Trap Flash (CTF) and phase change RAM (PRAM, also referred to as Phase Change Memory—PCM) cells. FRAM, MRAM and PRAM cells are described, for example, by Kim and Koh in “Future Memory Technology including Emerging New Memories,” Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Microelectronics (MIEL), Nis, Serbia and Montenegro, May 16-19, 2004, volume 1, pages 377-384, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Arrays of analog memory cells are typically erased before they are used for storing data. A memory cell array is usually partitioned into cell groups, referred to as erasure blocks, which are erased simultaneously. In many memory devices, one of the programming levels is defined as an erased level, and the cells are erased by applying erasure pulses or voltages. Often, the erased level corresponds to a negative threshold voltage, and the cells are erased by applying negative erasure pulses. Various techniques are known in the art for erasing analog memory cells and for verifying that the cells are erased properly.
For example, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2004/0114437, whose disclosure is incorporated herein by reference, describes a method of erasing a nonvolatile memory so as to compact the distribution of erased cell threshold voltages within a restricted range around a target erased threshold voltage. Erase pulses are applied to the cells until a determination is made that adequate erasure has been realized. Once erasure has been verified, the distribution of erased threshold voltages is compacted by sustaining, for a predetermined length of time, the simultaneous application of a gate voltage that is equal to the target erased threshold voltage and a highly positive drain voltage.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,237,535, whose disclosure is incorporated herein by reference, describes a method of repairing over-erased cells in a Flash memory array, which includes a column having a first cell and a second cell. Repair begins by determining whether the first cell is over-erased and applying a programming pulse if so. Next, the second cell is examined to determine whether it is over-erased. A programming pulse is applied to the second cell if it is over-erased. Afterward, if either of the cells was over-erased, the repair pulse voltage level is incremented. These steps are repeated until none of the cells in the column is identified as over-erased.
An embodiment of the present invention provides a method for data storage, including:
performing an erasure operation on a group of analog memory cells;
identifying as erase-failed cells one or more of the memory cells in the group that failed the erasure operation;
modifying, responsively to the identified erase-failed cells, a storage configuration that is used for programming the analog memory cells in the group; and
storing data in the group of the analog memory cells using the modified storage configuration.
In some embodiments, storing the data includes storing a portion of the data in at least one of the erase-failed cells. In a disclosed embodiment, identifying the erase-failed cells includes identifying a distribution of locations of the erase-failed cells across the group of the memory cells, and modifying the storage configuration includes setting the storage configuration responsively to the identified distribution of the locations. In some embodiments, the analog memory cells in the group are arranged in an array having multiple cell sub-groups, such that the cells in each of the sub-groups are programmed simultaneously, and identifying the distribution of the locations includes identifying a worst-performing sub-group containing a maximum number of the erase-failed cells.
In an embodiment, identifying the worst-performing sub-group includes applying a sequence of iterations to the multiple sub-groups, such that each iteration retains only a subset of the sub-groups that were retained by a preceding iteration in the sequence by selecting the subgroups having a count of the erase-failed cells that is above a predefined threshold. In another embodiment, the analog memory cells are arranged in multiple rows, each sub-group includes cells that are located in a respective row, and retaining the subset of the sub-groups includes biasing the rows corresponding to the sub-groups in the subset with a first bias voltage and biasing the rows corresponding to the sub-groups other than the sub-groups in the subset using a second bias voltage that is different from the first bias voltage. In yet another embodiment, applying the sequence of the iterations includes predefining a maximum permitted number of the iterations, and terminating the sequence upon reaching the maximum permitted number of the iterations.
In still another embodiment, the method includes classifying the group of the memory cells as unusable responsively to the identified distribution of the locations. In an embodiment, the analog memory cells are arranged in multiple columns, and modifying the storage configuration includes setting the storage configuration responsively to a count of the columns containing at least one of the erase-failed cells. In a disclosed embodiment, identifying the erase-failed cells includes identifying the erase-failed cells responsively to receiving a notification of a failure of the erasure operation.
In some embodiments, modifying the storage configuration includes modifying an Error Correction Code (ECC) that encodes the data in the group of the memory cells, modifying a storage capacity of at least some of the memory cells in the group and/or modifying a parameter of an iterative Program and Verify (P&V) process that is used for storing the data in the group of the memory cells. Additionally or alternatively, modifying the storage configuration may include setting the storage configuration responsively to a count of programming and erasure cycles applied to the group of the memory cells.
In an embodiment, identifying the erase-failed cells includes identifying locations of the erase-failed cells in the group of the memory cells and storing the identified locations, and the method includes reading the memory cells in the group and reconstructing the data responsively to the stored locations of the erase-failed cells. In another embodiment, storing the data includes encoding the data with an Error Correction Code (ECC), and reconstructing the data includes decoding the ECC using an ECC decoding process that accepts erasure indications, and identifying the locations of the erase-failed cells as erasure indications to the ECC decoding process. In yet another embodiment, storing the data and reading the memory cells include skipping the identified locations of the erase-failed cells.
There is additionally provided, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention, apparatus for data storage, including:
an interface, which is operative to communicate with a memory device that includes a plurality of analog memory cells; and
circuitry, which is coupled to perform an erasure operation on a group of the analog memory cells, to identify as erase-failed cells one or more of the memory cells in the group that failed the erasure operation, to modify, responsively to the identified erase-failed cells, a storage configuration that is used for programming the analog memory cells in the group, and to store data in the group of the analog memory cells using the modified storage configuration.
In a disclosed embodiment, the circuitry includes:
a Read/Write (R/W) unit, which is packaged in the memory device and is coupled to identify the erase-failed cells and to report information regarding the identified erase-failed cells over the interface; and
a processor, which is external to the memory device and is coupled to modify the storage configuration responsively to the information reported by the R/W unit.
In an alternative embodiment, the circuitry includes a processor that is external to the memory device.
There is also provided, in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention, apparatus for data storage, including:
a memory device, which includes a plurality of analog memory cells; and
a processor, which is coupled to perform an erasure operation on a group of the analog memory cells, to identify as erase-failed cells one or more of the memory cells in the group that failed the erasure operation, to modify, responsively to the identified erase-failed cells, a storage configuration that is used for programming the analog memory cells, and to store data in the group of the analog memory cells using the modified storage configuration.
There is further provided, a memory device, including:
a plurality of analog memory cells; and
Read/Write (R/W) circuitry, which is coupled to perform an erasure operation on a group of the analog memory cells, to identify as erase-failed one or more of the memory cells in the group that failed the erasure operation, and to report information regarding the identified erase-failed cells to a controller external to the memory device, so as to enable the controller to store data in the group of the analog memory cells.
The present invention will be more fully understood from the following detailed description of the embodiments thereof, taken together with the drawings in which:
Known schemes for storing data in analog memory cell arrays typically verify that a given memory block is erased properly before permitting the block to be used for data storage. In such schemes, a block containing cells that failed to erase properly is marked as a “bad block” and removed from service.
In most practical cases, however, the number of erase-failed cells in a given block is extremely small, while the vast majority of cells in the block are fully functional. Removing such a memory block from service causes unnecessary degradation in the memory device's storage capacity, since many thousands of fully-operational cells are discarded because of a small number of erase failures. The capacity degradation further increases over the life cycle of the memory device, as additional blocks fail to erase and are removed from service.
Embodiments of the present invention that are described hereinbelow provide methods and systems for storing data in memory blocks that contain erase-failed memory cells. The methods and systems described herein allow many such blocks to remain in service, thus increasing the storage capacity of the memory device and extending its useful lifetime.
In some embodiments, a Memory Signal Processor (MSP) stores data in a memory device, which comprises an array of analog memory cells. After performing an erasure operation on a group of memory cells (typically a block), the MSP may identify one or more erase-failed cells in the group that failed the erasure operation. The MSP modifies, based on the identified erase-failed cells, a storage configuration that is used for programming the analog memory cells. Data is subsequently stored in the group of analog memory cells using the modified storage configuration.
By modifying the storage configuration, the MSP matches the way data is stored in the cells to the expected degradation caused by the presence of erase-failed cells, so that data storage reliability is not compromised. In other words, the MSP stores data in the group of memory cells, including in the erase-failed cells, even though erase failures were detected. The data can still be reconstructed successfully because of the enhanced storage configuration.
The storage configuration can be modified based on, for example, the total number of erase-failed cells, the way the erase-failed cells are distributed across the array and/or the values stored in the erase-failed cells. The MSP may modify the storage configuration, for example, by modifying the storage capacity of the cells, modifying an Error Correction Code (ECC) that is used for encoding the data stored in the cells, and adjusting programming parameters such as verification thresholds and Program and Verify (P&V) step size.
In some embodiments, the MSP assesses the distribution of erase failures per word line, and sets the storage configuration accordingly. The number of erase failures per word line is an important figure-of-merit, especially when the data is encoded with ECC separately within each word line. In these configurations, the number of erase failures per word line influences the ability of the ECC to correct errors that may be caused by storing data in erase-failed cells. Efficient methods for identifying a word line (or group of word lines) having a maximum number of erase failures are described herein. Having identified the maximum number of erase failures per word line, the MSP can either set the storage configuration accordingly, or mark the block as bad. These methods can also be applied to individual memory pages within a word line.
Other disclosed methods adapt the storage configuration of memory blocks and classify blocks as good or bad based on the estimated number of bit lines having erase-failed cells or based on the history of previous Programming/Erasure (P/E) cycles the blocks have gone through.
When using the methods and systems described herein, the number of blocks that are classified as bad and removed from service is reduced considerably in comparison with known methods. As such, the disclosed methods and systems increase the storage capacity of memory devices and extend their useful lifetime.
System 20 comprises a memory device 24, which stores data in a memory cell array 28. The memory cell array comprises multiple analog memory cells 32. In the context of the present patent application and in the claims, the term “analog memory cell” is used to describe any memory cell that holds a continuous, analog value of a physical parameter, such as an electrical voltage or charge. Array 28 may comprise analog memory cells of any kind, such as, for example, NAND, NOR and CTF Flash cells, PCM, NROM, FRAM, MRAM and DRAM cells. Memory cells 32 may comprise Single-Level Cells (SLC) or Multi-Level Cells (MLC, also referred to as multi-bit cells).
The charge levels stored in the cells and/or the analog voltages or currents written into and read out of the cells are referred to herein collectively as analog values or storage values. Although the embodiments described herein mainly address threshold voltages, the methods and systems described herein may be used with any other suitable kind of storage values.
System 20 stores data in the analog memory cells by programming the cells to assume respective memory states, which are also referred to as programming levels. The programming levels are selected from a finite set of possible levels, and each level corresponds to a certain nominal storage value. For example, a 2 bit/cell MLC can be programmed to assume one of four possible programming levels by writing one of four possible nominal storage values to the cell. (The term MLC is used herein to describe any cell configuration that stores more than a single bit per cell. MLC configurations may store, for example, two, three or four bits per cell.)
Memory device 24 comprises a reading/writing (R/W) unit 36, which converts data for storage in the memory device to storage values and writes them into memory cells 32. In alternative embodiments, the R/W unit does not perform the conversion, but is provided with voltage samples, i.e., with the storage values for storage in the cells. The R/W unit typically (although not necessarily) programs the cells using an iterative Program and Verify (P&V) process, as is known in the art. When reading data out of array 28, R/W unit 36 converts the storage values of memory cells 32 into digital samples having a resolution of one or more bits. Data is typically written to and read from the memory cells in groups that are referred to as pages. In addition to writing and reading data, R/W unit 36 erases groups of memory cells 32 before they are used for storing data.
The storage and retrieval of data in and out of memory device 24 is performed by a Memory Signal Processor (MSP) 40. MSP 40 comprises an interface 44 for communicating with memory device 24, and a signal processing unit 48, which processes the data that is written into and read from device 24. In some embodiments, unit 48 produces the storage values for storing in the memory cells and provides these values to R/W unit 36. Alternatively, unit 48 provides the data for storage, and the conversion to storage values is carried out by the R/W unit internally to the memory device.
MSP 40 communicates with a host 52, for accepting data for storage in the memory device and for outputting data retrieved from the memory device. MSP 40, and in particular unit 48, may be implemented in hardware. Alternatively, MSP 40 may comprise a microprocessor that runs suitable software, or a combination of hardware and software elements.
The configuration of
In the exemplary system configuration shown in
Typically, the MSP (or any other controller or processor that carries out some or all of the methods described herein) comprises a general-purpose processor, which is programmed in software to carry out the functions described herein. The software may be downloaded to the processor in electronic form, over a network, for example, or it may, alternatively or additionally, be provided and/or stored on tangible media, such as magnetic, optical, or electronic memory.
Memory cells 32 of array 28 are typically arranged in a grid having multiple rows and columns, commonly referred to as word lines and bit lines, respectively. The array is typically divided into multiple pages, i.e., groups of memory cells that are programmed and read simultaneously. Cells are typically erased in groups of word lines that are referred to as erasure blocks.
In some embodiments, R/W unit 36 programs memory cells 32 using an iterative Program and Verify (P&V) process. In a typical P&V process, an entire memory page is written by applying a sequence of programming pulses to a group of memory cells that are mapped to this page. The level of the programming pulses increases incrementally from pulse to pulse. The storage values programmed in the cells are read (“verified”) after each pulse, and the iterations continue until the desired levels are reached.
In the four-level example of
In the embodiments described herein, the erased level has negative threshold voltages. This choice is, however, not mandatory. In alternative embodiments, any other programming level (i.e., any other range of threshold voltages) can be defined as the erased level.
Typically, an erase verification process comprises verifying that the cells' threshold voltages are negative, such as by reading the cells using a read threshold that is positioned at 0V. Cells whose threshold voltage is read as negative are regarded as properly erased, and vice versa. In some embodiments, the cells are verified for over-erasure, as well. In other words, the threshold voltage of an erased cell is sometimes not permitted to be below a certain negative threshold. Erase verification may be performed by the MSP or by R/W unit 36 in the memory device.
This situation may be caused by an improper erasure process, e.g., when the erasure voltage applied to the cells is insufficient. Alternatively, improper erasure may result from defects in some of the memory cells or from any other reason. In many devices, the likelihood of erase failures increases with the number of programming/erasure cycles the block has gone through. In some cases, a block that was properly erased may become improperly erased over time, because of voltage drift in the cells.
As can be seen in the figure, however, the vast majority of the cells in distribution 68 is still negative and can be regarded as properly erased. The methods and systems described below allow a memory block, which has a threshold voltage distribution such as distribution 68, to be used for data storage.
Embodiments of the present invention provide methods and systems, which store data in memory blocks having memory cells that failed to erase properly. In some embodiments, system 20 identifies the erase-failed cells in a given block of array 28. The system then specifies a storage configuration for storing data in the block based on the identified erase-failed cells.
In the description that follows, the erase-failed cells are identified by MSP 40. In alternative embodiments, however, R/W unit 36 in memory device 24 may comprise circuitry that identifies erase-failed cells and reports information regarding these cells (e.g., their number, distribution and/or locations) to the MSP. Counting the erase-failed cells internally in the memory device is often more power-, throughput- and time-efficient than performing these operations in an external controller such as the MSP. On the other hand, counting the erase-failed cells by the external controller may be more efficient in terms of the memory device die size.
In the embodiments described herein, an erased cell whose threshold voltage is not negative is regarded as erase-failed. Alternatively, however, the system may regard cells as erase-failed cells based on any other suitable criterion. For example, over-erased cells can also be regarded as erase-failed.
In order to specify the appropriate storage configuration for a given erased block, the MSP identifies the number, locations and/or distribution of the erase-failed cells in the block. For example, the MSP may count the total number of cells in the block that failed to erase (e.g., the total number of cells whose threshold voltage is positive). In some embodiments, the memory device comprises a NAND Flash device, in which the cells are arranged in multiple NAND strings, as are known in the art. In these configurations, the MSP can approximate the total number of erase-failed cells by the number of NAND strings having at least one erase-failed cell. Counting NAND strings rather than individual cells reduces the complexity of the operation considerably, since it does not require separate reading operations per each word line in the block.
Further alternatively, the MSP may determine the distribution of the erase failures across the array. This information can be used for optimal selection of the appropriate storage configuration, as will be explained below. For example, each block of cells 32 is typically divided into sub-groups (e.g., word lines or pages), such that the cells in each sub-group are programmed and read simultaneously. The MSP may count the number of erase-failed cells in each sub-group in the block (e.g., in each word line, in odd- and even-order cells or in different bits of the cells of each word line). In some embodiments, the MSP constructs a histogram of the threshold voltages of the erase-failed cells in each sub-group. For example, the MSP may read each sub-group using N different read thresholds, and count the number of cells (per sub-group) whose threshold voltages exceed each read threshold. The description that follows refers mainly to word lines, however the methods and systems described herein can be applied to other sorts of cell sub-groups.
The MSP may set the storage configuration for the given block based on the identified erase-failed cells in a number of ways. For example, the MSP may modify the storage capacity of the cells, i.e., the number of bits per cell. In some embodiments, the MSP sets a certain storage configuration for the entire block. Alternatively, the MSP may modify the storage configuration selectively for parts of the block, e.g., for pages or word lines that suffer from a high number of erase-failed cells and/or from erase-failed cells having exceedingly high threshold voltages. Modifying the capacity can be carried out, for example, by modifying the number of programming levels used for programming the cells or by skipping some of the pages in the block. In some embodiments, the data stored in the cells is encoded with an Error Correction Code (ECC), and the MSP modifies the block's capacity by modifying the redundancy level (e.g., the code rate) of the ECC.
Additionally or alternatively, the MSP may change the ECC that is used for encoding the stored data so as to match the number, locations and/or distribution of the identified erase-failed cells. For example, erase-failed cells are typically characterized by a specific type of read error, in which the cell's threshold voltage was meant to be in the erased level but is read as being in the next-higher programming level. A given ECC may be optimized to provide a high correction capability for this type of error. The MSP may employ this ECC in blocks or pages having a high number of erase-failed cells. In other blocks or pages, the MSP may use another ECC, which has similar correction capabilities for different types of errors.
As noted above, R/W unit 36 typically programs cells 32 using an iterative P&V process. In such a process, each programming level has a corresponding verify threshold, and the R/W unit verifies that the cells reach their intended programming levels by comparing the cells' threshold voltages to the appropriate verify thresholds. As another example of modifying the storage configuration, the MSP may modify the verify thresholds based on the identified erase-failed cells. Modifying the verify thresholds effectively modifies the range of threshold voltages occupied by the different programming levels.
In order to overcome a high number of erase failures, the MSP may increase the value of the lowest verify threshold, so as to reduce the number of erase-failed cells whose threshold voltages exceed the lowest verify threshold. Modification of the verify threshold can be performed en bloc for the entire block, or for individual pages having a high number of erase failures. The MSP may determine the appropriate values of the verify thresholds based on a histogram the threshold voltages of the erase-failed cells, if such a histogram is available.
When the cells are programmed using an iterative P&V process, the MSP may modify the P&V step size, i.e., the amplitude difference between successive programming pulses, based on the identified erase-failed cells. In these embodiments, if the number of erase failures is high, the MSP may reduce the P&V step size to improve the programming accuracy. The higher accuracy reduces the likelihood of read errors, and therefore improves the resilience to errors caused by erase failures. Programming the cells using a small P&V step size increases the programming time.
Therefore, the MSP typically uses a small step size only when necessary, i.e., only in blocks, word lines or pages that suffer from a high number of erase-failed cells. Improved accuracy may be especially important when the verify thresholds are modified, since this modification often reduces the total available threshold voltage range.
Typically, a cell is declared as erase-failed when its threshold voltage exceeds a certain erase verify threshold (which is often set to 0V). The erase verify threshold is used for differentiating between the erased level and the first programming level. In many cases, a slight increase in the value of this threshold will cause many of the erase-failed cells to fall below the threshold and be regarded as properly erased. The slight increase in the erase verify threshold value can often be tolerated with little or no performance degradation.
Thus, in some embodiments, the MSP modifies the storage configuration by slightly increasing the value of the erase verify threshold (and sometimes also the lowest read threshold that is used for reading the cells). For example, when the nominal value of the erase verify threshold is 0V, the MSP may shift the threshold to 0.1 or 0.2V. In some embodiments, the MSP shifts the erase verify threshold for a given block in response to a notification from the memory device that the block has failed to erase. Additionally or alternatively, the MSP may vary the erase verify threshold based on other criteria, such as based on the number of programming and erasure cycles the block has gone through, or the error correction capabilities of the ECC.
In some embodiments, the MSP stores the locations of the identified erase-failed cells, such as in a suitable location in array 28. The MSP can use the stored locations of the erase-failed cells in order to improve the quality of reading the data stored in the block. For example, the MSP sometimes uses an ECC decoding process, which takes into account quality metrics or other indications as to the reliability or confidence of the input values. Any suitable indication can be used for this purpose, such as, for example, Log-Likelihood Ratios (LLR) of certain bits, parameters of likelihood functions used with maximum-likelihood decoders, and various other weighting functions. In particular, some ECC decoders accept indications in the form of erasures. An erasure typically comprises an indication that a specific input value is uncertain (i.e., conveys little or no information as to the stored data) and should be given little or no weight in the decoding process.
The MSP may use such indications to improve the performance of the ECC decoding process. For example, in some embodiments the MSP stores data in the block regardless of whether the cells are erased properly or not. When reading the data, the MSP indicates to the ECC decoding process which of the read values was read from an erase-failed cell. The MSP may assign the values read from erase-failed cells a relatively low metric value, in comparison with values read from functional cells. Alternatively, the MSP may mark the values read from erase-failed cells as erasures to the ECC decoder. When retrieving the data, the MSP decodes the ECC based on the indications described above. By means of the indications, the ECC decoding process assigns little or no weight to the values read from erase-failed cells, and its decoding performance is therefore improved. Further alternatively, the MSP may skip the locations marked as erase-failed when programming and reading the block.
The storage configurations and modifications described above are chosen purely by way of example. In alternative embodiments, the MSP may modify, based on the identified erase-failed cells, any other suitable kind of storage configuration that is used for storing data in the cells. As noted above, identification of the erase-failed cells may be carried out by the MSP or by circuitry residing in the memory device itself.
In some embodiments, the MSP determines whether or not to modify the storage configuration based on the number or distribution of the erase-failed cells. For example, if the number of erase-failed cells is sufficiently small, the ECC used by the MSP may be sufficient to correct any errors caused by these cells, without a need to use additional means. Thus, the MSP may refrain from modifying the storage configuration if the number of erase-failed cells is within the correction capabilities of the ECC. Typically, ECC is applied per page. Therefore, the MSP may count or estimate the number of erase-failed cells per page, and decide whether to modify the storage configuration accordingly. In some embodiments, the MSP identifies the worst-performing page (or group of pages), i.e., the page having the maximum number of erase failures. Methods of this sort are described, for example, in
If, on the other hand, the memory device reported that erasure of the block has failed, the MSP (or the memory device) determines the number, locations and/or distribution of the erase-failed cells in the block, at a cell identification step 82. The MSP (or memory device) may use any suitable technique for counting or estimating the number, locations and/or distribution of erase-failed cells, such as the methods described herein.
Based on the identified erase-failed cells, the MSP modifies the default storage configuration, at a storage modification step 86. Any suitable modification of storage configuration can be applied, such as the examples given above. The MSP stores data in the block using the modified storage configuration, at data storage step 78.
In many practical cases, the success or failure of reading data from the block depends on the maximum number of erase-failed cells per word line. For example, when the data in each word line is encoded separately with an ECC, data decoding is likely to succeed if the number of erase-failed cells in each word line is lower than the error correction capability of the ECC. On the other hand, if the number of erase-failed cells in a certain word line exceeds the error correction capability of the ECC, the data will not be read correctly.
Thus, a situation in which the erase-failed cells are distributed evenly among the different word lines of the array is often preferable over a situation in which the same number of erase-failed cells is concentrated in a small number of word lines. In other words, the appropriate storage configuration (or a decision whether the block is to be considered bad or usable) often depends on the worst-performing word line, i.e., the word line containing the highest number of erase-failed cells.
(Typically, a certain margin is assumed between the permitted number of erase-failed cells and the correction capability of the ECC. For example, if the ECC is able to correct one hundred errors per word line, the maximum permitted number of erase-failures per word line may be set to ten, thus leaving ample error correction resources to mitigate distortion and other error factors.)
In some embodiments, the MSP counts the number of erase failures in each word line in the block exhaustively, so as to determine the worst-performing word line. Then, the MSP matches the storage configuration (or classifies the block as good or bad) according to the number of erase failures found in the worst-performing word line.
Alternatively, the MSP may apply an iterative process that identifies an upper bound on the number of erase failures in the worst-performing word line in a given block. The MSP then matches the storage configuration to the upper bound. In the description that follows, the MSP checks whether the bound on the number of erase-failed cells in the worst-performing word line can be handled by the ECC, and retains or discards the block accordingly. Alternatively, however, the MSP may use the identified upper bound to set the appropriate storage configuration. Although the description that follows refers to word lines and groups of word lines, the method can be applied to individual pages (e.g., when each word line contains multiple pages, each encoded separately with ECC).
The description that follows illustrates an iterative search process for identifying the worst-performing word line or group of word lines. The process has a constrained number of iterations. The process divides the set of word lines into groups, which gradually decrease in size. When permitted a large number of iterations, the process converges to the worst-performing word line. When permitted a smaller number of iterations, the process identifies a worst-performing group of word lines (i.e., a group of word lines of a given size having the largest number of erase-failed cells). The number of word lines in the group decreases gradually with each iteration.
The MSP counts the number of erase-failed cells in any new word line group that was created in the previous iteration of the process, at a new group counting step 98. (In the first iteration, the MSP counts the number of erase-failed cells in the initial group initialized at step 94.) The MSP then checks whether the number of erase-failed cells is tolerable for all groups, at an acceptability checking step 102. (Typically, the MSP compares the number of erase-failed cells to a predefined threshold. A number of erase failures that is lower than the threshold is regarded as tolerable, and vice versa.) If the number of erase-failed cells is tolerable for all groups, the MSP classifies the block as a good block, at a success classification step 106.
Otherwise (i.e., if the MSP finds at least one word line group having an intolerable number of erase failures), the MSP checks whether the maximum permitted number of iterations was reached, at a maximum iteration checking step 110. If reached, the MSP classifies the block as bad, at a failure classification step 114.
If the maximum number of iterations was not reached, the MSP divides each of the word line groups whose number of erase failures was found to be intolerable into K smaller groups, at a division step 118. K is typically set to 2, although any other suitable value can also be used. The method then loops back to step 98 above, and the MSP counts the number of erase failures in the newly created groups and continues the iterative process.
In some cases, the iterative search process terminates before converging to the single worst-performing word line. In these cases, the process identifies the worst-performing group of word lines and determines the number of erase failures in that group. This number can serve as an upper bound on the maximum number of errors per word line.
The number of erase failures that can be verified using this process depends on a number of factors, such as the maximum permitted number of iterations, the distribution of erase failures among the word lines and the strategy of searching for these errors (e.g., depth first, breadth first, as well as the value of K). In the best case, number of verification steps needed for validating block with F·T erase failures is F (wherein F denotes an arbitrary factor and T denotes the predefined upper threshold on the acceptable erase failures per word line). In the worst case, F·(1+LOGK(N/F)) iterations are needed, with N denoting the number of word lines. In some embodiments, the MSP can adjust the erase verify threshold based on the number of read word lines. In these embodiments, when a small number of word lines is read, the MSP uses a slightly higher erase verify threshold, so as to approximate an erase verify threshold that corresponds to a larger number of word lines.
As noted above, additionally or alternatively to classifying the block as good or bad, the MSP can also use the identified bound on the maximum number of erase failures per word line to match the storage configuration to the actual capability of the ECC. Since the method matches the storage configuration (or the decision to invalidate the block) to the distribution of erase-failures per word line or group of word lines, it is highly accurate in comparison to methods that consider only the total number of erase failures in the block.
The search process of
In each iteration of the search process of
Bias voltage RV1 is typically selected to differentiate between the erased level and the first programming level (e.g., by setting RV1=0V). When the gate of a certain cell is biased with RV1, the cell will conduct if it is properly erased, and vice versa. VPASS is typically set above the highest programming level of the cells, so that cells biased with VPASS will conduct regardless of whether they are erased or not.
When the cells along a given column of the memory array are connected to a bit line, the bit line will conduct (i.e., will be read as “1” when sensed) if all the cells that are biased with RV1 are properly erased. If the bit line contains at least one cell, which is biased with RV1 and is not erased properly, the bit line will be read as “0”. Thus, this biasing scheme enables the MSP or memory device circuitry to detect erase failures in only a selected subset of the word lines. In particular, when performing each iteration of the search process of
The contents of page register 120 indicate the number and identity of the bit lines, which have at least one erase-failed cell. As such, the page register can provide the MSP with a rough assessment of the erase failure status of the block. In some embodiments, the MSP classifies the block as good or bad based on this information. For example, the MSP may regard a given block as good if the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is lower than a certain threshold (denoted TH1), without attempting to determine how the erase failures are distributed among the word lines. The assumption is that the ECC is likely to correct these erase failures. At the other extreme, if the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is higher than a second threshold (denoted TH2), the MSP may classify the block as bad. This decision is again taken without determining the erase failure distribution among the word lines. The assumption here is that the ECC is likely to fail when the number of erase failures is high.
For intermediate value, i.e., when the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is between the two thresholds, the MSP examines the block in more detail. The MSP identifies the number, locations and/or distribution of the erase failures in the block, such as using any of the processes described herein. The MSP classifies the block based on the results of the detailed examination. This technique is computationally-efficient, since it performs the detailed (and computationally-intensive) process of assessing the erase failure distribution for only a subset of the blocks.
The MSP checks whether the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is smaller than threshold TH1, at a first comparison step 134. If the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is smaller than TH1, the MSP classifies the block as good, at a good block classification step 138. Otherwise, the MSP checks whether the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is larger than threshold TH2, at a second comparison step 142. If the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is larger than TH2, the MSP classifies the block as bad, at a bad block classification step 146.
If the number of bit lines having erase-failed cells is between TH1 and TH2, the MSP determines the number, locations and/or distribution of erase-failed cells in the block, at a distribution evaluation step 150. The MSP checks whether the number, locations and/or distribution of erase failures is tolerable, at an intermediate checking step 154. If tolerable, the MSP classifies the block as good at step 138. Otherwise, the block is classified as bad at step 146.
The number of bit lines having erase failures can be assessed in various ways, and the method of
Additionally or alternatively to classifying the block as good or bad, the MSP can use the above-mentioned methods to select an appropriate storage configuration for the block based on the number of bit lines having erase failures.
As noted above, many known memory devices report the success or failure of erasing a given block. In some embodiments of the present invention, the MSP sometimes decides to override (i.e., ignore) this status notification, and continue using a block that has been declared by the memory device as bad. For example, it may be found that most of the bad blocks in a given type of memory device are revealed during the first N Programming/Erasure (P/E) cycles. (N is typically on the order of several tens of thousands, e.g., 20,000 cycles, although any other suitable number can also be used.) The number of new erase failures that occur after the first N P/E cycles is relatively small.
In such a situation, the MSP may disregard erase failure notifications from the memory device for blocks that have gone through a number of P/E cycles that that exceed a predefined threshold (e.g., 20,000). The assumption is that the ECC will be able to correct any additional erase failures that occur after this point.
Although the embodiments described herein mainly address data storage and retrieval in solid-state memory devices, the principles of the present invention can also be used for storing and retrieving data in Hard Disk Drives (HDD) and other data storage media and devices.
It will thus be appreciated that the embodiments described above are cited by way of example, and that the present invention is not limited to what has been particularly shown and described hereinabove. Rather, the scope of the present invention includes both combinations and sub-combinations of the various features described hereinabove, as well as variations and modifications thereof which would occur to persons skilled in the art upon reading the foregoing description and which are not disclosed in the prior art.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/IL2008/001356 | 10/12/2008 | WO | 00 | 3/9/2010 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2009/050703 | 4/23/2009 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3668631 | Griffith et al. | Jun 1972 | A |
3668632 | Oldham | Jun 1972 | A |
4058851 | Scheuneman | Nov 1977 | A |
4112502 | Scheuneman | Sep 1978 | A |
4394763 | Nagano et al. | Jul 1983 | A |
4413339 | Riggle et al. | Nov 1983 | A |
4556961 | Iwahashi et al. | Dec 1985 | A |
4558431 | Satoh | Dec 1985 | A |
4608687 | Dutton | Aug 1986 | A |
4654847 | Dutton | Mar 1987 | A |
4661929 | Aoki et al. | Apr 1987 | A |
4768171 | Tada | Aug 1988 | A |
4811285 | Walker et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4899342 | Potter et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4910706 | Hyatt | Mar 1990 | A |
4993029 | Galbraith et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
5056089 | Furuta et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5077691 | Haddad et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5077722 | Geist et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5126808 | Montalvo et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5163021 | Mehrotra et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5172338 | Mehrotta et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5182558 | Mayo | Jan 1993 | A |
5182752 | DeRoo et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5191584 | Anderson | Mar 1993 | A |
5200959 | Gross et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5237535 | Mielke et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5272669 | Samachisa et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5276649 | Hoshita et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5287469 | Tsuboi | Feb 1994 | A |
5365484 | Cleveland et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5388064 | Khan | Feb 1995 | A |
5416646 | Shirai | May 1995 | A |
5416782 | Wells et al. | May 1995 | A |
5418752 | Harari et al. | May 1995 | A |
5446854 | Khalidi et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5450424 | Okugaki et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5469444 | Endoh et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5473753 | Wells et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5479170 | Cauwenberghs et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5508958 | Fazio et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5519831 | Holzhammer | May 1996 | A |
5532962 | Auclair et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5533190 | Binford et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5541886 | Hasbun | Jul 1996 | A |
5600677 | Citta et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5638320 | Wong et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5657332 | Auclair et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5659550 | Mehrotra et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5675540 | Roohparvar | Oct 1997 | A |
5682352 | Wong et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5687114 | Khan | Nov 1997 | A |
5696717 | Koh | Dec 1997 | A |
5726649 | Tamaru et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5726934 | Tran et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742752 | De Koening | Apr 1998 | A |
5748533 | Dunlap et al. | May 1998 | A |
5748534 | Dunlap et al. | May 1998 | A |
5751637 | Chen et al. | May 1998 | A |
5761402 | Kaneda et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5798966 | Keeney | Aug 1998 | A |
5799200 | Brant et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5801985 | Roohparvar et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5838832 | Barnsley | Nov 1998 | A |
5860106 | Domen et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5862080 | Harari et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5867114 | Barbir | Feb 1999 | A |
5867428 | Ishii et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5867429 | Chen et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5877986 | Harari et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5889937 | Tamagawa | Mar 1999 | A |
5901089 | Korsh et al. | May 1999 | A |
5909449 | So et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5912906 | Wu et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5930167 | Lee et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5937424 | Leak et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5942004 | Cappelletti | Aug 1999 | A |
5946716 | Karp et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5969986 | Wong et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5982668 | Ishii et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991517 | Harari et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995417 | Chen et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6009014 | Hollmer et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009016 | Ishii et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6023425 | Ishii et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6034891 | Norman | Mar 2000 | A |
6040993 | Chen et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6041430 | Yamauchi | Mar 2000 | A |
6073204 | Lakhani et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6101614 | Gonzales et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6128237 | Shirley et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134140 | Tanaka et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134143 | Norman | Oct 2000 | A |
6134631 | Jennings | Oct 2000 | A |
6141261 | Patti | Oct 2000 | A |
6151246 | So et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6157573 | Ishii et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6166962 | Chen et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6169691 | Pasotti et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6178466 | Gilbertson et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185134 | Tanaka et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6209113 | Roohparvar | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212654 | Lou et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6219276 | Parker | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6219447 | Lee et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6222762 | Guterman et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6230233 | Lofgren et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240458 | Gilbertson | May 2001 | B1 |
6259627 | Wong | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6275419 | Guterman et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278632 | Chevallier | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6279069 | Robinson et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6288944 | Kawamura | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6292394 | Cohen et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6301151 | Engh et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304486 | Yano | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304488 | Abedifard et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6307776 | So et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314044 | Sasaki et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6317363 | Guterman et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6317364 | Guterman et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6345004 | Omura et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6360346 | Miyauchi et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363008 | Wong | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363454 | Lakhani et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366496 | Torelli et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6385092 | Ishii et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6392932 | Ishii et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6396742 | Korsh et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397364 | Barkan | May 2002 | B1 |
6405323 | Lin et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405342 | Lee | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6418060 | Yong et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6442585 | Dean et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6445602 | Kokudo et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6452838 | Ishii et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6456528 | Chen | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6466476 | Wong et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6467062 | Barkan | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6469931 | Ban et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6480948 | Virajpet et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6490236 | Fukuda et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6522580 | Chen et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6525952 | Araki et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6532181 | Saito et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6532556 | Wong et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6538922 | Khalid et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6549464 | Tanaka et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6553510 | Pekny | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6558967 | Wong | May 2003 | B1 |
6560152 | Cernea | May 2003 | B1 |
6567311 | Ishii et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6577539 | Iwahashi | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6584012 | Banks | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6615307 | Roohparvar | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6621739 | Gonzales et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6640326 | Buckingham et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6643169 | Rudelic et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6646913 | Micheloni et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6678192 | Gongwer et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6683811 | Ishii et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6687155 | Nagasue | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6707748 | Lin et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6708257 | Bao | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6714449 | Khalid | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6717847 | Chen | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6731557 | Beretta | May 2004 | B2 |
6732250 | Durrant | May 2004 | B2 |
6738293 | Iwahashi | May 2004 | B1 |
6751766 | Guterman et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6757193 | Chen et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6774808 | Hibbs et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6781877 | Cernea et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6804805 | Rub | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6807095 | Chen et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6807101 | Ooishi et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6809964 | Moschopoulos et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6819592 | Noguchi et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6829167 | Tu et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6845052 | Ho et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6851018 | Wyatt et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6851081 | Yamamoto | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6856546 | Guterman et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6862218 | Guterman et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6870767 | Rudelic et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6870773 | Noguchi et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6873552 | Ishii et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6879520 | Hosono et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6882567 | Wong | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6894926 | Guterman et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6907497 | Hosono et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6914846 | Harari et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6925009 | Noguchi et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6930925 | Guo et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6934188 | Roohparvar | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6937511 | Hsu et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6958938 | Noguchi et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6963505 | Cohen | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6972993 | Conley et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6988175 | Lasser | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6992932 | Cohen | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6999344 | Hosono et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7002843 | Guterman et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7006379 | Noguchi et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7012835 | Gonzales et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7020017 | Chen et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7023735 | Ban et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7031210 | Park et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7031214 | Tran | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7031216 | You | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7039846 | Hewitt et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7042766 | Wang et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7054193 | Wong | May 2006 | B1 |
7054199 | Lee et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7057958 | So et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7065147 | Ophir et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7068539 | Guterman et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7071849 | Zhang | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7072222 | Ishii et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7079555 | Baydar et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7088615 | Guterman et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7099194 | Tu et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7102924 | Chen et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7113432 | Mokhlesi | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7130210 | Bathul et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7139192 | Wong | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7139198 | Guterman et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7145805 | Ishii et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7151692 | Wu | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7154803 | Martinelli et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7158058 | Yu | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7170781 | So et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7170802 | Cernea et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7173859 | Hemink | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7177184 | Chen | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7177195 | Gonzales et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7177199 | Chen et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7177200 | Ronen et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7184319 | Micheloni et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7184338 | Nagakawa et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7187195 | Kim | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7187592 | Guterman et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7190614 | Wu | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7193898 | Cernea | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7193921 | Choi et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7196644 | Anderson et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7196928 | Chen | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7196933 | Shibata | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7197594 | Raz et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7200062 | Kinsely et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7210077 | Brandenberger et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7221592 | Nazarian | May 2007 | B2 |
7224613 | Chen et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7231474 | Helms et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7231562 | Ohlhoff et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7243275 | Gongwer et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7254690 | Rao | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7254763 | Aadsen et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7257027 | Park | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7259987 | Chen et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7266026 | Gongwer et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7266069 | Chu | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7269066 | Nguyen et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7272757 | Stocken | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7274611 | Roohparvar | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7277355 | Tanzana | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7280398 | Lee et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7280409 | Misumi et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7280415 | Hwang et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7283399 | Ishii et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7289344 | Chen | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7301807 | Khalid et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7301817 | Li et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7308525 | Lasser et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7310255 | Chan | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7310269 | Shibata | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7310271 | Lee | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7310272 | Mokhesi et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7310347 | Lasser | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7312727 | Feng et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7321509 | Chen et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7328384 | Kulkarni et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7342831 | Mokhlesi et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7343330 | Boesjes et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7345924 | Nguyen et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7345928 | Li | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7349263 | Kim et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7356755 | Fackenthal | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7363420 | Lin et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7365671 | Anderson | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7388781 | Litsyn et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7397697 | So et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7405974 | Yaoi et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7405979 | Ishii et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7408804 | Hemink et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7408810 | Aritome et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7409473 | Conley et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7409623 | Baker et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7420847 | Li | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7433231 | Aritome | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7433697 | Karaoguz et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7434111 | Sugiura et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7437498 | Ronen | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7440324 | Mokhlesi | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7440331 | Hemink | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7441067 | Gorobetz et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7447970 | Wu et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7450421 | Mokhlesi et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7453737 | Ha | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7457163 | Hemink | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7457897 | Lee et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7460410 | Nagai et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7460412 | Lee et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7466592 | Mitani et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7468907 | Kang et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7468911 | Lutze et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7469049 | Feng | Dec 2008 | B1 |
7471581 | Tran et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7483319 | Brown | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7487329 | Hepkin et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7487394 | Forhan et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7492641 | Hosono et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7508710 | Mokhlesi | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7526711 | Orio | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7539061 | Lee | May 2009 | B2 |
7539062 | Doyle | May 2009 | B2 |
7551492 | Kim | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7558109 | Brandman et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7558839 | McGovern | Jul 2009 | B1 |
7568135 | Cornwell et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7570520 | Kamei et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7574555 | Porat et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7590002 | Mokhlesi et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7593259 | Kim | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7594093 | Kancherla | Sep 2009 | B1 |
7596707 | Vemula | Sep 2009 | B1 |
7609787 | Jahan et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7613043 | Cornwell et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7616498 | Mokhlesi et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7619918 | Aritome | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7631245 | Lasser | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7633798 | Sarin et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7633802 | Mokhlesi | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7639532 | Roohparvar et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7644347 | Alexander et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7656734 | Thorp et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7660158 | Aritome | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7660183 | Ware et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7661000 | Ueda et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7661054 | Huffman et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7665007 | Yang et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7680987 | Clark et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
7733712 | Walston et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7742351 | Inoue et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7761624 | Karamcheti et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7797609 | Neuman | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7810017 | Radke | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7848149 | Gonzales et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7869273 | Lee et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7885119 | Li | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7904783 | Brandman et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7928497 | Yaegashi | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7929549 | Talbot | Apr 2011 | B1 |
7930515 | Gupta et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7945825 | Cohen et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7978516 | Olbrich et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8014094 | Jin | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8037380 | Cagno et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8040744 | Gorobets et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8065583 | Radke | Nov 2011 | B2 |
20010002172 | Tanaka et al. | May 2001 | A1 |
20010006479 | Ikehashi et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20020038440 | Barkan | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020056064 | Kidorf et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020118574 | Gongwer et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020133684 | Anderson | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020166091 | Kidorf et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020174295 | Ulrich et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020196510 | Hietala et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030002348 | Chen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030103400 | Van Tran | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030161183 | Van Tran | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030174555 | Conley et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030189856 | Cho et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040057265 | Mirabel et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040057285 | Cernea et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040083333 | Chang et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040083334 | Chang et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040105311 | Cernea et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040114437 | Li | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040160842 | Fukiage | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040223371 | Roohparvar | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040223399 | Campardo et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050007802 | Gerpheide | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050013165 | Ban | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050024941 | Lasser et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050024978 | Ronen | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050030788 | Parkinson et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050086574 | Fackenthal | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050121436 | Kamitani et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050144361 | Gonzalez et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050157555 | Ono et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050162913 | Chen | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050169051 | Khalid et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050189649 | Maruyama et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050213393 | Lasser | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050224853 | Ohkawa | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240745 | Iyer et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050243626 | Ronen | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060004952 | Lasser | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060028875 | Avraham et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060028877 | Meir | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060101193 | Murin | May 2006 | A1 |
20060106972 | Gorobets et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060107136 | Gongwer et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060129750 | Lee et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060133141 | Gorobets | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060156189 | Tomlin | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060179334 | Brittain et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060190699 | Lee | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060203546 | Lasser | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060218359 | Sanders et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060221692 | Chen | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060221705 | Hemink et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060221714 | Li et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060239077 | Park et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060239081 | Roohparvar | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060256620 | Nguyen et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060256626 | Werner et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060256891 | Yuan et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060271748 | Jain et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060285392 | Incarnati et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060285396 | Ha | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070006013 | Moshayedi et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070019481 | Park | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070033581 | Tomlin et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070047314 | Goda et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070047326 | Nguyen et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070050536 | Kolokowsky | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070058446 | Hwang et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070061502 | Lasser et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070067667 | Ikeuchi et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070074093 | Lasser | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070086239 | Litsyn et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070086260 | Sinclair | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070089034 | Litsyn et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070091677 | Lasser et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070091694 | Lee et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070103978 | Conley et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070103986 | Chen | May 2007 | A1 |
20070104211 | Opsasnick | May 2007 | A1 |
20070109845 | Chen | May 2007 | A1 |
20070109849 | Chen | May 2007 | A1 |
20070115726 | Cohen et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070118713 | Guterman et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070143378 | Gorobetz | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070143531 | Atri | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070159889 | Kang et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070159892 | Kang et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070159907 | Kwak | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070168837 | Murin | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070171714 | Wu et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070183210 | Choi et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070189073 | Aritome | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070195602 | Fong et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070206426 | Mokhlesi | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070208904 | Hsieh et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070226599 | Motwani | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070236990 | Aritome | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070253249 | Kang et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070256620 | Viggiano et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070263455 | Cornwell et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070266232 | Rodgers et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070271424 | Lee et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070280000 | Fujiu et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070291571 | Balasundaram | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070297234 | Cernea et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080010395 | Mylly et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080025121 | Tanzawa | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080043535 | Roohparvar | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080049504 | Kasahara et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080049506 | Guterman | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080052446 | Lasser et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080055993 | Lee | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080080243 | Edahiro et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080082730 | Kim et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080089123 | Chae et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080104309 | Cheon et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080104312 | Lasser | May 2008 | A1 |
20080109590 | Jung et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080115017 | Jacobson | May 2008 | A1 |
20080123420 | Brandman et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080123426 | Lutze et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080126686 | Sokolov et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080130341 | Shalvi et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080148115 | Sokolov et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080151618 | Sharon et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080151667 | Miu et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080158958 | Sokolov et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080181001 | Shalvi | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080198650 | Shalvi et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080198654 | Toda | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209116 | Caulkins | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080209304 | Winarski et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080215798 | Sharon et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080219050 | Shalvi et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080239093 | Easwar et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080239812 | Abiko et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080253188 | Aritome | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080263262 | Sokolov et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080263676 | Mo et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080270730 | Lasser et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080282106 | Shalvi et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080288714 | Salomon et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090013233 | Radke | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090024904 | Roohparvar et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090024905 | Shalvi et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090034337 | Aritome | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090043831 | Antonopoulos et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090043951 | Shalvi et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090049234 | Oh et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090073762 | Lee et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090086542 | Lee et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090089484 | Chu | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090091979 | Shalvi | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090094930 | Schwoerer | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090106485 | Anholt | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090112949 | Ergan et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090132755 | Radke | May 2009 | A1 |
20090144600 | Perlmutter et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090150894 | Huang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157950 | Selinger | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157964 | Kasorla et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090158126 | Perlmutter et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090168524 | Golov et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090172257 | Prins et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090172261 | Prins et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090193184 | Yu et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090199074 | Sommer et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090204824 | Lin et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090204872 | Yu et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090213653 | Perlmutter et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090213654 | Perlmutter et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090225595 | Kim | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090228761 | Perlmutter et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090240872 | Perlmutter et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090265509 | Klein | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090300227 | Nochimowski et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090323412 | Mokhlesi et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090327608 | Eschmann | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100017650 | Chin et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100034022 | Dutta et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100057976 | Lasser | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100061151 | Miwa et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100082883 | Chen et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100083247 | Kanevsky et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100110580 | Takashima | May 2010 | A1 |
20100131697 | Alrod et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100142268 | Aritome | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100142277 | Yang et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100169547 | Ou | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100169743 | Vogan et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100174847 | Paley et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100211803 | Lablans | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100287217 | Borchers et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110010489 | Yeh | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110060969 | Ramamoorthy et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110066793 | Burd | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110075482 | Shepard et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110107049 | Kwon et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110149657 | Haratsch et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110199823 | Bar-Or et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110302354 | Miller | Dec 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0783754 | Jul 1997 | EP |
1434236 | Jun 2004 | EP |
1605509 | Dec 2005 | EP |
9610256 | Apr 1996 | WO |
9828745 | Jul 1998 | WO |
02100112 | Dec 2002 | WO |
03100791 | Dec 2003 | WO |
2007046084 | Apr 2007 | WO |
2007132452 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2007132453 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2007132456 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2007132457 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2007132458 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2007146010 | Dec 2007 | WO |
2008026203 | Mar 2008 | WO |
2008053472 | May 2008 | WO |
2008053473 | May 2008 | WO |
2008068747 | Jun 2008 | WO |
2008077284 | Jul 2008 | WO |
2008083131 | Jul 2008 | WO |
2008099958 | Aug 2008 | WO |
2008111058 | Sep 2008 | WO |
2008124760 | Oct 2008 | WO |
2008139441 | Nov 2008 | WO |
2009037691 | Mar 2009 | WO |
2009037697 | Mar 2009 | WO |
2009038961 | Mar 2009 | WO |
2009050703 | Apr 2009 | WO |
2009053961 | Apr 2009 | WO |
2009053962 | Apr 2009 | WO |
2009053963 | Apr 2009 | WO |
2009063450 | May 2009 | WO |
2009072100 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009072101 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009072102 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009072103 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009072104 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009072105 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009074978 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009074979 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009078006 | Jun 2009 | WO |
2009095902 | Aug 2009 | WO |
2011024015 | Mar 2011 | WO |
Entry |
---|
US 7,161,836, 01/2007, Wan et al. (withdrawn) |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/323,544 Office Action dated Dec. 13, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/332,368 Office Action dated Nov. 10, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/063,544 Office Action dated Dec. 14, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/186,867 Office Action dated Jan. 17, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/119,069 Office Action dated Nov. 14, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/037,487 Office Action dated Jan. 3, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/995,812 Office Action dated Oct. 28, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/551,567 Office Action dated Oct. 27, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/618,732 Office Action dated Nov. 4, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/649,382 Office Action dated Jan. 6, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/284,909, filed Oct. 30, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/284,913, filed Oct. 30, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/338,335, filed Dec. 28, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/355,536, filed Jan. 22, 2012. |
Kim et al., “Multi-bit Error Tolerant Caches Using Two-Dimensional Error Coding”, Proceedings of the 40th Annual ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO-40), Chicago, USA, Dec. 1-5, 2007. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/995,814 Official Action dated Dec. 17, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/388,528 Official Action dated Nov. 29, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/251,471 Official Action dated Jan. 3, 2011. |
Engineering Windows 7, “Support and Q&A for Solid-State Drives”, e7blog, May 5, 2009. |
Micron Technology Inc., “Memory Management in NAND Flash Arrays”, Technical Note, year 2005. |
Kang et al., “A Superblock-based Flash Translation Layer for NAND Flash Memory”, Proceedings of the 6th ACM & IEEE International Conference on Embedded Software, pp. 161-170, Seoul, Korea, Oct. 22-26, 2006. |
Park et al., “Sub-Grouped Superblock Management for High-Performance Flash Storages”, IEICE Electronics Express, vol. 6, No. 6, pp. 297-303, Mar. 25, 2009. |
“How to Resolve “Bad Super Block: Magic Number Wrong” in BSD”, Free Online Articles Director Article Base, posted Sep. 5, 2009. |
UBUNTU Forums, “Memory Stick Failed IO Superblock”, posted Nov. 11, 2009. |
Super User Forums, “SD Card Failure, can't read superblock”, posted Aug. 8, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/987,174 “Redundant Data Storage in Multi-Die Memory Systems”, filed Jan. 10, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/987,175 “Redundant Data Storage Schemes for Multi-Die Memory Systems” filed Jan. 10, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/963,649 “Memory Management Schemes for Non-Volatile Memory Devices” filed Dec. 9, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/021,754 “Reducing Peak Current in Memory Systems” filed Feb. 6, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/323,544 Official Action dated Mar. 9, 2012. |
Chinese Patent Application # 200780026181.3 Official Action dated Mar. 7, 2012. |
Chinese Patent Application # 200780026094.8 Official Action dated Feb. 2, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/332,370 Official Action dated Mar. 8, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/579,432 Official Action dated Feb. 29, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/522,175 Official Action dated Mar. 27, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/607,085 Official Action dated Mar. 28, 2012. |
Budilovsky et al., “Prototyping a High-Performance Low-Cost Solid-State Disk”, SYSTOR—The 4th Annual International Systems and Storage Conference, Haifa, Israel, May 30-Jun. 1, 2011. |
NVM Express Protocol, “NVM Express”, Revision 1.0b, Jul. 12, 2011. |
SCSI Protocol, “Information Technology—SCSI Architecture Model—5 (SAM-5)”, INCITS document T10/2104-D, revision 01, Jan. 28, 2009. |
SAS Protocol, “Information Technology—Serial Attached SCSI-2 (SAS-2)”, INCITS document T10/1760-D, revision 15a, Feb. 22, 2009. |
JEDEC Standard JESD84-C44, “Embedded MultiMediaCard (e•MMC) Mechanical Standard, with Optional Reset Signal”, Jedec Solid State Technology Association, USA, Jul. 2009. |
JEDEC, “UFS Specification”, version 0.1, Nov. 11, 2009. |
SD Group and SD Card Association, “SD Specifications Part 1 Physical Layer Specification”, version 3.01, draft 1.00, Nov. 9, 2009. |
COMPAQ et al., “Universal Serial Bus Specification”, revision 2.0, Apr. 27, 2000. |
Serial ATA International Organization, “Serial ATA Revision 3.0 Specification”, Jun. 2, 2009. |
Gotou, H., “An Experimental Confirmation of Automatic Threshold Voltage Convergence in a Flash Memory Using Alternating Word-Line Voltage Pulses”, IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 18, No. 10, pp. 503-505, Oct. 1997. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/534,898 Official Action dated Mar. 23, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/047,822, filed Mar. 15, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/069,406, filed Mar. 23, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/088,361, filed Apr. 17, 2011. |
Agrell et al., “Closest Point Search in Lattices”, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 48, No. 8, pp. 2201-2214, Aug. 2002. |
Bez et al., “Introduction to Flash memory”, Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 91, No. 4, pp. 489-502, Apr. 2003. |
Blahut, R.E., “Theory and Practice of Error Control Codes,” Addison-Wesley, May 1984, section 3.2, pp. 47-48. |
Chang, L., “Hybrid Solid State Disks: Combining Heterogeneous NAND Flash in Large SSDs”, ASPDAC, Jan. 2008. |
Cho et al., “Multi-Level NAND Flash Memory with Non-Uniform Threshold Voltage Distribution,” IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference (ISSCC), San Francisco, CA, Feb. 5-7, 2001, pp. 28-29 and 424. |
Databahn™, “Flash memory controller IP”, Denali Software, Inc., 1994 https://www.denali.com/en/products/databahn—flash.jsp. |
Datalight, Inc., “FlashFX Pro 3.1 High Performance Flash Manager for Rapid Development of Reliable Products”, Nov. 16, 2006. |
Duann, N., Silicon Motion Presentation “SLC & MLC Hybrid”, Flash Memory Summit, Santa Clara, USA, Aug. 2008. |
Eitan et al., “Can NROM, a 2-bit, Trapping Storage NVM Cell, Give a Real Challenge to Floating Gate Cells?”, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Solid State Devices and Materials (SSDM), pp. 522-524, Tokyo, Japan 1999. |
Eitan et al., “Multilevel Flash Cells and their Trade-Offs”, Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM), pp. 169-172, New York, USA 1996. |
Engh et al., “A self adaptive programming method with 5 mV accuracy for multi-level storage in Flash”, pp. 115-118, Proceedings of the IEEE 2002 Custom Integrated Circuits Conference, May 12-15, 2002. |
Goodman et al., “On-Chip ECC for Multi-Level Random Access Memories,” Proceedings of the IEEE/CAM Information Theory Workshop, Ithaca, USA, Jun. 25-29, 1989. |
Han et al., “An Intelligent Garbage Collection Algorithm for Flash Memory Storages”, Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2006, vol. 3980/2006, pp. 1019-1027, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, Germany, May 11, 2006. |
Han et al., “CATA: A Garbage Collection Scheme for Flash Memory File Systems”, Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, vol. 4159/2006, pp. 103-112, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, Aug. 25, 2006. |
Horstein, “On the Design of Signals for Sequential and Nonsequential Detection Systems with Feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory IT—12:4 (Oct. 1966), pp. 448-455. |
Jung et al., in “A 117 mm.sup.2 3.3V Only 128 Mb Multilevel NAND Flash Memory for Mass Storage Applications,” IEEE Journal of Solid State Circuits, (11:31), Nov. 1996, pp. 1575-1583. |
Kawaguchi et al. 1995. A flash-memory based file system. In Proceedings of the USENIX 1995 Technical Conference , New Orleans, Louisiana. 155-164. |
Kim et al., “Future Memory Technology including Emerging New Memories”, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Microelectronics (MIEL), vol. 1, pp. 377-384, Nis, Serbia and Montenegro, May 16-19, 2004. |
Lee et al., “Effects of Floating Gate Interference on NAND Flash Memory Cell Operation”, IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 264-266, May 2002. |
Maayan et al., “A 512 Mb NROM Flash Data Storage Memory with 8 MB/s Data Rate”, Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Solid-State circuits Conference (ISSCC 2002), pp. 100-101, San Francisco, USA, Feb. 3-7, 2002. |
Mielke et al., “Recovery Effects in the Distributed Cycling of Flash Memories”, IEEE 44th Annual International Reliability Physics Symposium, pp. 29-35, San Jose, USA, Mar. 2006. |
Onfi, “Open NAND Flash Interface Specification,” revision 1.0, Dec. 28, 2006. |
Phison Electronics Corporation, “PS8000 Controller Specification (for SD Card)”, revision 1.2, Document No. S-07018, Mar. 28, 2007. |
Shalvi, et al., “Signal Codes,” Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Information Theory Workshop (ITW'2003), Paris, France, Mar. 31-Apr. 4, 2003. |
Shiozaki, A., “Adaptive Type-II Hybrid Broadcast ARQ System”, IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 44, Issue 4, pp. 420-422, Apr. 1996. |
Suh et al., “A 3.3V 32Mb NAND Flash Memory with Incremental Step Pulse Programming Scheme”, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 30, No. 11, pp. 1149-1156, Nov. 1995. |
ST Microelectronics, “Bad Block Management in NAND Flash Memories”, Application note AN-1819, Geneva, Switzerland, May 2004. |
ST Microelectronics, “Wear Leveling in Single Level Cell NAND Flash Memories,” Application note AN-1822 Geneva, Switzerland, Feb. 2007. |
Takeuchi et al., “A Double Level Vth Select Gate Array Architecture for Multi-Level NAND Flash Memories”, Digest of Technical Papers, 1995 Symposium on VLSI Circuits, pp. 69-70, Jun. 8-10, 1995. |
Takeuchi et al., “A Multipage Cell Architecture for High-Speed Programming Multilevel NAND Flash Memories”, IEEE Journal of Solid State Circuits, vol. 33, No. 8, Aug. 1998. |
Wu et al., “eNVy: A non-Volatile, Main Memory Storage System”, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Architectural support for programming languages and operating systems, pp. 86-87, San Jose, USA, 1994. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000575 Patentability report dated Mar. 26, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000575 Search Report dated May 30, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000576 Patentability Report dated Mar. 19, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000576 Search Report dated Jul. 7, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000579 Patentability report dated Mar. 10, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000579 Search report dated Jul. 3, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000580 Patentability Report dated Mar. 10, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000580 Search Report dated Sep. 11, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000581 Patentability Report dated Mar. 26, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/000581 Search Report dated Aug. 25, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/001059 Patentability report dated Apr. 19, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/001059 Search report dated Aug. 7, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/001315 search report dated Aug. 7, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/001315 Patentability Report dated May 5, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/001316 Search report dated Jul. 22, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/001316 Patentability Report dated May 5, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2007/001488 Search report dated Jun. 20, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2008/000329 Search report dated Nov. 25, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2008/000519 Search report dated Nov. 20, 2008. |
International Application PCT/IL2008/001188 Search Report dated Jan. 28, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2008/001356 Search Report dated Feb. 3, 2009. |
International Application PCT/IL2008/001446 Search report dated Feb. 20, 2009. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/949,135 Official Action dated Oct. 2, 2009. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/019,011 Official Action dated Nov. 20, 2009. |
Sommer, N., U.S. Appl. No. 12/171,797 “Memory Device with Non-Uniform Programming Levels” filed Jul. 11, 2008. |
Shalvi et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/251,471 “Compensation for Voltage Drifts in Analog Memory Cells” filed Oct. 15, 2008. |
Sommer et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/497,707 “Data Storage in Analog Memory Cells with Protection Against Programming Interruption” filed Jul. 6, 2009. |
Winter et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/534,893 “Improved Data Storage in Analog Memory Cells Using Modified Pass Voltages” filed Aug. 4, 2009. |
Winter et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/534,898 “Data Storage Using Modified Voltages” filed Aug. 4, 2009. |
Shalvi et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/551,583 “Segmented Data Storage” filed Sep. 1, 2009. |
Shalvi et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/551,567 “Reliable Data Storage in Analog Memory Cells Subjected to Long Retention Periods” filed Sep. 1, 2009. |
Perlmutter et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/558,528 “Estimation of Memory Cell Read Thresholds by Sampling Inside Programming Level Distribution Intervals” filed Sep. 13, 2009. |
Sokolov, D., U.S. Appl. No. 12/579,430 “Efficient Programming of Analog Memory Cell Devices” filed Oct. 15, 2009. |
Shalvi, O., U.S. Appl. No. 12/579,432 “Efficient Data Storage in Storage Device Arrays” filed Oct. 15, 2009. |
Sommer et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/607,078 “Data Scrambling in Memory Devices” filed Oct. 28, 2009. |
Sommer et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/607,085 “Data Scrambling Schemes for Memory Devices” filed Oct. 28, 2009. |
Shalvi et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/618,732 “Storage at M Bits/Cell Density in N Bits/Cell Analog Memory Cell Devices, M>N” filed Nov. 15, 2009. |
Sommer et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/649,358 “Efficient Readout Schemes for Analog Memory Cell Devices” filed Dec. 30, 2009. |
Sommer et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/649,360 “Efficient Readout Schemes for Analog Memory Cell Devices Using Multiple Read Threshold Sets” filed Dec. 30, 2009. |
Rotbard et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/649,382 “Rejuvenation of Analog Memory Cells” filed Dec. 30, 2009. |
Shachar et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/688,883 “Hierarchical data storage system” filed Jan. 17, 2010. |
Shalvi, O., U.S. Appl. No. 12/758,044 “Memory device with negative thresholds” filed Apr. 12, 2010. |
Sokolov et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/714,501 “Selective Activation of Programming Schemes in Analog Memory Cell Arrays” filed Feb. 28, 2010. |
Sokolov et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/728,287 “Use of host system resources by memory controller” filed Mar. 22, 2010. |
Sommer et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/728,296 “Database of Memory Read Threshods” filed Mar. 22, 2010. |
Sommer et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/758,003 “Selective re-programming of analog memory cells” filed Apr. 11, 2010. |
Ankolekar et al., “Multibit Error-Correction Methods for Latency-Constrained Flash Memory Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Device and Materials Reliability, vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 33-39, Mar. 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/344,233 Official Action dated Jun. 24, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/995,813 Official Action dated Jun. 16, 2011. |
Berman et al., “Mitigating Inter-Cell Coupling Effects in MLC NAND Flash via Constrained Coding”, Flash Memory Summit, Santa Clara, USA, Aug. 19, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/178,318 Official Action dated May 31, 2011. |
CN Patent Application # 200780026181.3 Official Action dated Apr. 8, 2011. |
Huffman, A., “Non-Volatile Memory Host Controller Interface (NVMHCI)”, Specification 1.0, Apr. 14, 2008. |
Panchbhai et al., “Improving Reliability of NAND Based Flash Memory Using Hybrid SLC/MLC Device”, Project Proposal for CSci 8980—Advanced Storage Systems, University of Minnesota, USA, Spring 2009. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/957,970 Official Action dated May 20, 2010. |
Shalvi et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/822,207 “Adaptive Over-Provisioning in Memory Systems” filed Jun. 24, 2010. |
Wei, L., “Trellis-Coded Modulation With Multidimensional Constellations”, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. IT-33, No. 4, pp. 483-501, Jul. 1987. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/114,049 Official Action dated Sep. 12, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/405,275 Official Action dated Jul. 29, 2011. |
Conway et al., “Sphere Packings, Lattices and Groups”, 3rd edition, chapter 4, pp. 94-135, Springer, New York, USA 1998. |
Chinese Patent Application # 200780040493.X Official Action dated Jun. 15, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/037,487 Official Action dated Oct. 3, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/649,360 Official Action dated Aug. 9, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/192,504, filed Jul. 28, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/192,852, filed Aug. 2, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/231,963, filed Sep. 14, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/239,408, filed Sep. 22, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/239,411, filed Sep. 22, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/214,257, filed Aug. 22, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/192,501, filed Jul. 28, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/192,495, filed Jul. 28, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/880,101 “Reuse of Host Hibernation Storage Space by Memory Controller”, filed Sep. 12, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/890,724 “Error Correction Coding Over Multiple Memory Pages”, filed Sep. 27, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/171,797 Official Action dated Aug. 25, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/497,707 Official Action dated Sep. 15, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/995,801 Official Action dated Oct. 15, 2010. |
Numonyx, “M25PE16: 16-Mbit, page-erasable serial flash memory with byte-alterability, 75 MHz SPI bus, standard pinout”, Apr. 2008. |
Hong et al., “NAND Flash-based Disk Cache Using SLC/MLC Combined Flash Memory”, 2010 International Workshop on Storage Network Architecture and Parallel I/Os, pp. 21-30, USA, May 3, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/945,575 Official Action dated Aug. 24, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/045,520 Official Action dated Nov. 16, 2010. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100199150 A1 | Aug 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61093366 | Sep 2008 | US | |
61076647 | Jun 2008 | US | |
60981117 | Oct 2007 | US |