Preventive eMMC replacement on MCU1

[.jg.]

....However, the MCU in my car lasted 170,000ish miles and 7ish years. The eMMC is a component that has a specific span of life. Much like tires and break pads. Those components can also present safety issues in the right situation.

This raises an interesting point. If the eMMC is deemed to be a non-serviceable part, then Tesla might be reasonably expected to replace failed MCUs, as having a design flaw (i.e. Tesla should have specified eMMC chips of a type and size more suited to this application). On the other hand, if Tesla takes the view that eMMC chips should be expected to wear out and fail, like tyres and brake pads, then anti-competition laws in some regions (e.g. EU) would require Tesla to provide the the technical information needed to replace eMMCs to third party repair/servicing shops. (The laws are intended to prevent dealer networks from controlling all repair and servicing, blocking competition and setting artificially high prices).

 

[MP3Mike]

This raises an interesting point. If the eMMC is deemed to be a non-serviceable part, then Tesla might be reasonably expected to replace failed MCUs, as having a design flaw (i.e. Tesla should have specified eMMC chips of a type and size more suited to this application). On the other hand, if Tesla takes the view that eMMC chips should be expected to wear out and fail, like tyres and brake pads, then anti-competition laws in some regions (e.g. EU) would require Tesla to provide the the technical information needed to replace eMMCs to third party repair/servicing shops. (The laws are intended to prevent dealer networks from controlling all repair and servicing, blocking competition and setting artificially high prices).

Would the law really require information on replacing the eMMC? Tesla treats the MCU as a unit, and only does MCU swaps. So would that mean they only have to provide the information necessary for a third party to do a MCU swap. (Not that it is very different.)

But does the law require them to give their cryptographic keys to third parties? Can third party companies replace the home/fingerprint button on iPhones? Or what about replacing Subaru transmissions? (I know a transmission repair place and if they replace a transmission in a Subaru they have to have it towed to the dealer to cryptographically authorize the transmission for the car. They don't make any tool/information available to repair shops in the US to do it themselves.)

 

[hpartsch]

I can assure you I understand the frustration this issue can cause. The MCU failure in my car caused a major crisis in my family that I was helpless in. However, the MCU in my car lasted 170,000ish miles and 7ish years. The eMMC is a component that has a specific span of life. Much like tires and break pads. Those components can also present safety issues in the right situation.

I am a fan of this car and the company that produced it. I do not believe either is without their faults. I choose to contribute to the improvement of the company and the cars. I've participated in online car forums since the early 90s when it was basically an e-mail distribution. I've watched as many of them made a turn for the worse and became mostly negative. Please do not turn this forum into a negative environment that bashes the company and products it is founded on.

Please don't take this as a personal attack as I would have made the same comments to MP3Mike. It's a request to make this an environment where people want to participate and share information. Right now there are too many people not willing to share the information they have.

With the recent news that Tesla's are 8 times less likely to catch fire. Let's try to make the statistic the same for its online posts.

I am totally also a fan of the car and company. However, unlike tires and breaks -- we can monitor and replace to prevent such crises. Yes, there might be the occasional blowout or even nail damage; however, these are easily fixed nationwide.

Additionally, I disagree that this was envisioned to be such a problem. Especially considering how little maintenance Teslas are expected to have. I doubt many people consider one or multiple $3.5k repairs bills to be low maintenance concerns.

My main screen has crashed multiple times while driving in the past few months. It is currently in service and this will be looked at. My car has 61k mles on it. However, since it is not broken and not replicated on the spot -- I doubt the MCU will be replaced. That is great yours lasted so long; however, many have failed with much less mileage. There are too many variables for the average joe to consider when a failure will occur.

I say lots of positive things about Tesla. However, this is a negative issue that is persistent and worries me for my family and others who also will deal with this in likely less than ideal circumstances, similar to yours. I personally think this should be a TSB/recall item as the failure rate seems to be high.

No worries, I'm not taking it as a personal attack. There is a cheap and easy fix; however, Tesla does not permit it and refurbishes the MCU/eMMC -- likely making quite a profit on each repair.

 

[rooter]

People don't not share information publicly because Tesla will close it as soon as it's disclosed. Tesla has to be one of the most unfriendly self service type cars ever. They sign the parts specifically preventing you from just dropping in replacements, unless you know the magic. So, even if you had a part that was brand new and willing to do the work to replace it, you can't because Tesla hasn't signed it for your car.

Yes, Tesla plugs any security holes they become aware of. And they will even pay for the knowledge. So for example if you share information on how to root a Tesla privately with a few people one of them could sell it to Tesla and it would get closed for everyone.
If you are only talking about information on how to replace the eMMC, I would think that is safe as I can't imagine how Tesla could block that. (Well I suppose they could have their software look for a non-standard eMMC chip, but I don't think that is something they would do.)

I am weary of this tired canard that all information must be withheld out of fear of Tesla.

There are many things that can be shared and there is nothing that Tesla can do about it, including the most powerful Fusee Gelee adaptation. Only replacement of hardware can counter that fundamental hack.

I'd shared a good deal of 'safe' information, which was understood by, trusted, and benefited only a few. Nevertheless now that I am down (I believe due to actions of 'Ingineer'), not one of the four who are ostensibly open info advocates has responded to my requests for help. Despite proof that I do not share 'vulnerable' information. Name them? No I am better than that.

No, there is something else going on here and this behavior is the same as those with craven commercial motivations. There is no evidence to the contrary. These people are smart enough to be able to reason out what is safe to share and what is not... yet, nothing. No one except me has made any HowTo's, despite my regular lobbying.

I am not getting any help, so this is what we do; screw those who are able and in need. We will hold up the shield of the fear of Tesla as an excuse. Open information which is SAFE, is dead. And I have put the lid on not because I wanted to, but because I am down and do not have time to figure it out for myself like I have always had to.

I've been an open-source advocate for 22 years and this hurts, but that's life, get used to it. Figure it out yourself.

 

[.jg.]

Would the law really require information on replacing the eMMC? Tesla treats the MCU as a unit, and only does MCU swaps.

I don't think they could claim that a whole MCU is subject to wear and tear, to be replaced at intervals just like tyres, brakes, etc. Regular MCU replacement was never part of any Tesla service schedule. If Tesla want to claim that we should expect eMMCs to wear out then they should provide the technical info needed to replace them.
However, I don't think eMMCs or MCUs should be considered as service item like tyres or brake pads. I think the eMMCs used represent a bad design choice, especially given the rate of logging in the MCU => the product was defective at the time of sale and MCUs should be replaced/fixed by Tesla without charge. Interestingly, in England and Wales, there is a legal warranty of six years for defects present at the time of sale but I'm not aware that any UK Tesla owner has exploited this right (yet).

 

[BigD0g]

I am weary of this tired canard that all information must be withheld out of fear of Tesla.

There are many things that can be shared and there is nothing that Tesla can do about it, including the most powerful Fusee Gelee adaptation. Only replacement of hardware can counter that fundamental hack.

I'd shared a good deal of 'safe' information, which was understood by, trusted, and benefited only a few. Nevertheless now that I am down (I believe due to actions of 'Ingineer'), not one of the four who are ostensibly open info advocates has responded to my requests for help. Despite proof that I do not share 'vulnerable' information. Name them? No I am better than that.

No, there is something else going on here and this behavior is the same as those with craven commercial motivations. There is no evidence to the contrary. These people are smart enough to be able to reason out what is safe to share and what is not... yet, nothing. No one except me has made any HowTo's, despite my regular lobbying.

I am not getting any help, so this is what we do; screw those who are able and in need. We will hold up the shield of the fear of Tesla as an excuse. Open information which is SAFE, is dead. And I have put the lid on not because I wanted to, but because I am down and do not have time to figure it out for myself like I have always had to.

I've been an open-source advocate for 22 years and this hurts, but that's life, get used to it. Figure it out yourself.

With all due respect B.S. Let's point out example 1 shall we. For as long as I can remember crontab was safer persistence on Tesla s/x. The first release after the open source project that mentions cron tab for persistence and loading things automatically Tesla closed it by mounting over spool. Now, it's quite possible that the two are unrelated, but I sure down believe in coincidence when 1 data gets published publicly and the next move is they close that method. Keep in mind you can't do crap with crontab alone, you still need root, so the only reason to close this is to be a dick to the community.

 

[rooter]

With all due respect B.S. Let's point out example 1 shall we. For as long as I can remember crontab was safer persistence on Tesla s/x. The first release after the open source project that mentions cron tab for persistence and loading things automatically Tesla closed it by mounting over spool. Now, it's quite possible that the two are unrelated, but I sure down believe in coincidence when 1 data gets published publicly and the next move is they close that method. Keep in mind you can't do crap with crontab alone, you still need root, so the only reason to close this is to be a dick to the community.

This is not respectful, and it's not even on point.

I wrote articles on how to fix the black screen, how to root your car, and how to back up your firmware. And you nitpick one tiny issue, crontab? Their countermeasure is easily fixable, and it's only one small aspect when considering the scope of the information I provided. So, what? Root is 9/10ths of the law.

There is so much more that could have been freely disclosed, but was not. That is the point.

Frightened people piss me off.

Top Tip: Tesla has moved on from MCU1. They are making the new hardware unhackable, like I knew they would. It was bound to happen, who do we think they are?

Sometimes I despair for the public education system in America.

 

[S100D]

This is not respectful, and it's not even on point.

Top Tip: Tesla has moved on from MCU1. They are making the new hardware unhackable, like I knew they would. It was bound to happen, who do we think they are?

@rooter I thought Ingineerix said that any said that if you got physical access that any MCU could be rooted. I assumed that it meant that MCU2s could also be rooted.

 

[rooter]

I can say this now that they are doing it: Tesla is in the process of making purpose-built chips which internally contain the CPU, flash, RAM, etc. If they do it right we'll be left with only glitching and trying to solvent or shave off the layers to try and determine how it's built, which equipment is mainly owned by nation-states.

I mean, pay TV hackers have defeated smartcards for decades, but those are much simpler devices, and even so providers learned how to make it an hourly headache.

 

[S100D]

I can say this now that they are doing it: Tesla is in the process of making purpose-built chips which internally contain the CPU, flash, RAM, etc. If they do it right we'll be left with only glitching and trying to solvent or shave off the layers to try and determine how it's built, which equipment is mainly owned by nation-states.

I mean, pay TV hackers have defeated smartcards for decades, but those are much simpler devices, and even so providers learned how to make it an hourly headache.

I have a MCU 1 in my December 2016 Model S and wish Tesla would make the MCU 2 upgrade available. It is not a lot of fun having down level electronics that do not allow you to have the latest software features.

 

[rooter]

I am happy with my 2015, if I could just correct Ingineer's rat-fscking without unsoldering again. But looks like that's inevitable.

Envy was dictated as one of the Seven Deadly Sins. (Although, Editorial Note: Californians evidently haven't heard...)

 

[BigD0g]

This is not respectful, and it's not even on point.

I wrote articles on how to fix the black screen, how to root your car, and how to back up your firmware. And you nitpick one tiny issue, crontab? Their countermeasure is easily fixable, and it's only one small aspect when considering the scope of the information I provided. So, what? Root is 9/10ths of the law.

There is so much more that could have been freely disclosed, but was not. That is the point.

Frightened people piss me off.

Top Tip: Tesla has moved on from MCU1. They are making the new hardware unhackable, like I knew they would. It was bound to happen, who do we think they are?

Sometimes I despair for the public education system in America.

I was merely pointing out how tesla reacts to public leaks it “can” fix, even on obsolete mcu1 hardware.

It’s not being frightened, it’s taking tesla for face value. If you publicly disclose an issue or method they will close it, if it’s fixable.

 

[possum22]

Many stories out there tell that the flash storage (eMMC) on MCU1 will wear out sooner or later. This is known with flash memory and at that moment your Tesla will die. It won't charge and possibly only drive in limb-mode.

I have a 2013 S85 and a 2018 100D and the first one still has an MCU1 which has been running for 5,5 years now.

If the MCU dies Tesla will charge EUR 3000 (I'm in Europe) for a MCU replacement while only a small memory chip has failed.

I found this blog: Replacing eMMC in MCU

The same is shown in this video:

I've just ordered 64GB of eMMC storage for ~EUR 80 and a AllSocket eMMC programmer so that I can re-program the memory.

I'll go to a local electronics repair shop to help me with de-soldering and soldering the eMMC on the MCU. I'm thinking about doing this preventive to make sure the car doesn't die on me while driving. It's not a question of "if", but "when" it seems.

Has anybody replaced the eMMC memory on their MCU1 and can share some more experiences?

The link(Replacing eMMC in MCU) now returns 404 error, someone/thing has got to it?
Just as well linux remembers pass commands!

 

[widodh]

The link(Replacing eMMC in MCU) now returns 404 error, someone/thing has got to it?
Just as well linux remembers pass commands!

Yes, it's still here: freerobby/tesla-service-manual

Watch out with the 'dd' command! If you by accident revert 'if' and 'of' you'll overwrite your eMMC!

 

[Yurand]

Should having Energy Saving Mode on and Always Connected off theoretically prolong the life of the eMMC?

 

[Guvnah]

I am assuming turning off the logging that wears out the eMMC is only done by rooting? Is that right?

I had the MCU replaced less than a year ago and turning off the logging would seem to be enough of a measure...

 

[S100D]

I am assuming turning off the logging that wears out the eMMC is only done by rooting? Is that right?

I had the MCU replaced less than a year ago and turning off the logging would seem to be enough of a measure...

Yes, rooting is the only way to turn off logging to that EMMC.

 

[create]

So I take it playing games on MCU1 cars is a bad idea as it would keep the screen/MCU on and running therefore logging. Wonder if that is an angle that can be used to convince Tesla to do something about this issue since they are creating/adding functionality that prematurely wears out parts.

They should be writing logs to a ram based tmpfs. If they want to hang on to one then ship it to the cloud before shutting down.

I had my MCU replaced a few months ago. All I was able to get them to knock off was the labor. Mine is a dec 2015 build. I was over the 50k miles so no warranty.

 

[Exiom]

I have been following this issue for a while now even tho I dont have this issue myself...

and what baffles me is that... this isn't a new issue... and it has been documented by many since...

Why does Tesla still keep it turned on? If indeed as some say... Tesla would never look at them ever (sans debugging or at least not on customer cars)

and it would seem or I guess Tesla does in fact know about the issue? because they have "solved" the issue by increasing the capacity so it takes more time to die... or is it that they know they are killing it but doesn't know they can help it... so they just made it bigger?

I mean has someone with a bit more ties to Tesla or a white hat hacker who does have some sort of contact with Tesla can actually let them know of such things? Because I don't think this is something we as a customer can really get it across to them and get an answer...

 

[McMetric]

Had one emmc unsoldered from a spare MCU. Reads fine, all 4 partitions. No fsck errors. Wrote it on 64gig new Swissbit. Expanded fs. All looks good.
I could have the new chip soldered back on that spare board, but I cannot test if it works. Cant power up an MCU just by 12V with no ext. cables and hardware. This whole center units comes from a salvage car, just for spares.

But until here everything works.
So I now consider going directly to my working MCU from my car. Lets see if a new chip will work. Will take over a week (shipping to the solder ship 2 times)