From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1SjstN-0006US-4o for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 14:06:50 +0000 Message-ID: <1340806219.3070.23.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Subject: Re: UBIFS fails to mount on second boot From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Iwo Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:10:19 +0300 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-lfZXqtvvUF/+YDdwkGar" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --=-lfZXqtvvUF/+YDdwkGar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 15:23 +1000, Iwo wrote: > I'm trying to use a UBIFS partition as the linux root filesystem. > After flashing the > UBI image, the system boots successfully and is functional. >=20 > On the second boot, however, mounting of the UBIFS fails and the kernel p= anics. So this is reproducible? Can you provide me the ubifs image? > It is possible to avoid the failure by performing a large number of files= ystem > operations (i.e. file system benchmark) during the first session. Hmm, sounds strange. > Has anyone seen this before? Suggestions? Similar issue was reported once and the reported disappeared: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2012-June/042046.html > The hardware is a TI am335x processor with a 256MB, 2K pages, 128K erase = block > NAND flash. SLC flash? Did you validate your flash with MTD tests? > As is all too common, the flash supports sub-pages, the driver does > not. Thus, I'm > forcing the VID header offset to 2048. This means the driver is buggy: it does not support sub-pages but still reports that it does. Just fix it instead. > The kernel is a 3.1.0 with TI patches and UBI+UBIFS patches from > git://git.infradead.org/~dedekind/ubifs-v3.1.git today. I had to change > IS_ENABLED(DEBUG_FS) to IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS) > to make that compile. The original v3.1.0 UBI/UBIFS code exhibited > the same behaviour though. I'll fix the IS_ENABLED stuff, sorry for that. > The image is generated like so (using the latest MTD tools GIT): >=20 > mkfs.ubifs -d staging -F -o root.ubifs -m 0x800 -e 126976 -c 511 Did you try to mount an empty volume and let UBIFS auto-format it, and then reproduce the issue? --=20 Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy --=-lfZXqtvvUF/+YDdwkGar Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJP6xRLAAoJECmIfjd9wqK0jg4QAJRIHjWNhCFTN9vaiMWaTUKn 2Lw5IWDzg/DNpAHItC6w2whasQ2rz+ImdMkXSfUvQYB2Z3nXzopuDB/VLit8lreK 0zDuV+Ax1dtDJZ6bXvzrucDdsvouOz0q6cAWHm1gNPo8lpSRcmDJ9SjmM/Jm9/Sg ngPG/On/eZIIs/dMDZ7VDIFRXD7JQTRwKUn6hqYS/otqFvwijAlUawCwtaVQQyNV 3XWLtR7VenvkpAtdnmNX/xu7OPgjL/x0yqdvaPKPH+lU71Z18nNDpDB1XBTPR3zt DSKbgTmqIKfZeKIdX6pvHfXS+KYGqm0IpX2EgRwPWQNYiGg4AGDIPwK+rMOHs/zg EffC0xp0HOSmd13J2OFRw27GSxjsltB61yb5B2u4DnhjKsBnRGLTH7Y56MqG/MRS O3wl7IWFV42jX39kcl6aNR4GbJz4Yo+UZZBV9Xa1wK/vk1k/Dp7deCZPXK8fKSLu S2mtbUNLeL+v5jF3qzTZh+Pk3ANaBXZvmptAdb0pOCwpKy/ber8XNUu3wcLsRZOa 0DE+GD6YkklN92MoADTPq39DYPKXrnxPnIR3uMzmhd0nQHlHTQuPcHdSkKq5n6Gw pWLF3IOYfvem0jFc3vXXOHfr6owU2QLOp1MB6ofmLPjYpWIfsfoILA7h6a1HL0l4 Fdj3ma20q83ZIjMKifoS =RwIl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-lfZXqtvvUF/+YDdwkGar--