* Re: ubifs mount failure [not found] <MN2PR02MB5727000CBE70BAF31F60FEE4AF420@MN2PR02MB5727.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> @ 2019-12-03 8:41 ` Sascha Hauer 2019-12-03 9:00 ` Naga Sureshkumar Relli 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Sascha Hauer @ 2019-12-03 8:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naga Sureshkumar Relli Cc: Richard Weinberger, Miquel Raynal, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, siva.durga.paladugu, linux-mtd Hi, On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:52:32AM +0000, Naga Sureshkumar Relli wrote: > Hi, > > > > We have upgraded our Linux kernel to 5.4 from 4.19. > > And I tried mounting ubifs using this kernel on NAND partition with below > command and saw that > > There is an issue with memory allocation. > > #mount -t ubifs ubi0:data /mnt/ > > mount: mounting ubi0:data on /mnt/ failed: Cannot allocate memory > > > > I saw that there is a commit on fs/ubifs/sb.c, where it is allocating all > the required memories at one shot. > > [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/7/724 > > By reverting the above patch, I am able to mount successfully the ubifs. > > By reverting this patch, we are allocating, writing and freeing in a > manner such that, we don’t see memory allocation issues. Sorry, I can't see how this patch causes failing memory allocations. And no, this is not expected. Could you sprinkle some printks and track down where it fails? Is it the obvious place here: if (!sup || !mst || !idx || !ino || !cs) { err = -ENOMEM; goto out; } If yes, which allocation fails and how much memory did we try to allocate? If no, where does it fail? Also, where are you using UBIFS. Is it NAND flash or NOR flash? Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 8:41 ` ubifs mount failure Sascha Hauer @ 2019-12-03 9:00 ` Naga Sureshkumar Relli 2019-12-03 9:10 ` Richard Weinberger 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Naga Sureshkumar Relli @ 2019-12-03 9:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Richard Weinberger, Miquel Raynal, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, siva.durga.paladugu, linux-mtd Hi Sascha, > -----Original Message----- > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> > Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 2:12 PM > To: Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagasure@xilinx.com> > Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>; Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Michal Simek > <michals@xilinx.com>; siva.durga.paladugu@xililnx.com > Subject: Re: ubifs mount failure > > Hi, > > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:52:32AM +0000, Naga Sureshkumar Relli wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We have upgraded our Linux kernel to 5.4 from 4.19. > > > > And I tried mounting ubifs using this kernel on NAND partition with below > > command and saw that > > > > There is an issue with memory allocation. > > > > #mount -t ubifs ubi0:data /mnt/ > > > > mount: mounting ubi0:data on /mnt/ failed: Cannot allocate memory > > > > > > > > I saw that there is a commit on fs/ubifs/sb.c, where it is allocating all > > the required memories at one shot. > > > > [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/7/724 > > > > By reverting the above patch, I am able to mount successfully the ubifs. > > > > By reverting this patch, we are allocating, writing and freeing in a > > manner such that, we don’t see memory allocation issues. > > Sorry, I can't see how this patch causes failing memory allocations. And no, this is not > expected. Could you sprinkle some printks and track down where it fails? Is it the obvious > place here: Yes, it is failing in this place only. > > if (!sup || !mst || !idx || !ino || !cs) { > err = -ENOMEM; > goto out; > } > > If yes, which allocation fails and how much memory did we try to allocate? Failing at indexing node(idx) allocation https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 we are trying to allocate 4325376 (~4MB) > If no, where does it fail? Also, where are you using UBIFS. Is it NAND flash or NOR flash? It is on NAND flash. Thanks, Naga Sureshkumar Relli > > Sascha > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 9:00 ` Naga Sureshkumar Relli @ 2019-12-03 9:10 ` Richard Weinberger 2019-12-03 10:36 ` naga suresh kumar 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Richard Weinberger @ 2019-12-03 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naga Sureshkumar Relli Cc: Sascha Hauer, Miquel Raynal, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, siva durga paladugu, linux-mtd ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > Von: "Naga Sureshkumar Relli" <nagasure@xilinx.com> > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > we are trying to allocate 4325376 (~4MB) 4MiB? Is ->min_io_size that large? Thanks, //richard ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 9:10 ` Richard Weinberger @ 2019-12-03 10:36 ` naga suresh kumar 2019-12-03 10:45 ` Sascha Hauer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: naga suresh kumar @ 2019-12-03 10:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Weinberger Cc: Sascha Hauer, Miquel Raynal, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, linux-mtd, siva durga paladugu, Naga Sureshkumar Relli Hi Richard, On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 2:40 PM Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote: > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > Von: "Naga Sureshkumar Relli" <nagasure@xilinx.com> > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > we are trying to allocate 4325376 (~4MB) > > 4MiB? Is ->min_io_size that large? if you see https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 The size is actually ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size). Here tmp is of 4325376 Bytes and min_io_size is 16384 Bytes Thanks, Naga Sureshkumar Relli > > Thanks, > //richard > > ______________________________________________________ > Linux MTD discussion mailing list > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 10:36 ` naga suresh kumar @ 2019-12-03 10:45 ` Sascha Hauer 2019-12-03 10:53 ` naga suresh kumar 2019-12-03 19:08 ` Richard Weinberger 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Sascha Hauer @ 2019-12-03 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: naga suresh kumar Cc: Richard Weinberger, Miquel Raynal, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, linux-mtd, siva durga paladugu, Naga Sureshkumar Relli On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:06:12PM +0530, naga suresh kumar wrote: > Hi Richard, > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 2:40 PM Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote: > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > > Von: "Naga Sureshkumar Relli" <nagasure@xilinx.com> > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > > we are trying to allocate 4325376 (~4MB) > > > > 4MiB? Is ->min_io_size that large? > if you see https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > The size is actually ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size). > Here tmp is of 4325376 Bytes and min_io_size is 16384 Bytes 'tmp' contains bogus values. Try this: ----------------------------8<-------------------------------- From 34f687fce189085f55706b4cddcb288a08f4ee06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:41:20 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ubifs: Fix wrong memory allocation In create_default_filesystem() when we allocate the idx node we must use the idx_node_size we calculated just one line before, not tmp, which contains completely other data. Fixes: c4de6d7e4319 ("ubifs: Refactor create_default_filesystem()") Reported-by: Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagasure@xilinx.com> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> --- fs/ubifs/sb.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ubifs/sb.c b/fs/ubifs/sb.c index a551eb3e9b89..6681c18e52b8 100644 --- a/fs/ubifs/sb.c +++ b/fs/ubifs/sb.c @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static int create_default_filesystem(struct ubifs_info *c) sup = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_SB_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); mst = kzalloc(c->mst_node_alsz, GFP_KERNEL); idx_node_size = ubifs_idx_node_sz(c, 1); - idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); + idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(idx_node_size, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); ino = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_INO_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); cs = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_CS_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); -- 2.24.0 -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 10:45 ` Sascha Hauer @ 2019-12-03 10:53 ` naga suresh kumar 2019-12-04 10:08 ` Sascha Hauer 2019-12-03 19:08 ` Richard Weinberger 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: naga suresh kumar @ 2019-12-03 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Richard Weinberger, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, linux-mtd, Miquel Raynal, Naga Sureshkumar Relli, siva.durga.paladugu Hi Sascha, Tested this patch. and it worked. Thanks for your quick response. On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 4:16 PM Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:06:12PM +0530, naga suresh kumar wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 2:40 PM Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote: > > > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > > > Von: "Naga Sureshkumar Relli" <nagasure@xilinx.com> > > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > > > we are trying to allocate 4325376 (~4MB) > > > > > > 4MiB? Is ->min_io_size that large? > > if you see https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > The size is actually ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size). > > Here tmp is of 4325376 Bytes and min_io_size is 16384 Bytes > > 'tmp' contains bogus values. Try this: > > ----------------------------8<-------------------------------- > > From 34f687fce189085f55706b4cddcb288a08f4ee06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> > Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:41:20 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] ubifs: Fix wrong memory allocation > > In create_default_filesystem() when we allocate the idx node we must use > the idx_node_size we calculated just one line before, not tmp, which > contains completely other data. > > Fixes: c4de6d7e4319 ("ubifs: Refactor create_default_filesystem()") > Reported-by: Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagasure@xilinx.com> > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> > --- > fs/ubifs/sb.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/sb.c b/fs/ubifs/sb.c > index a551eb3e9b89..6681c18e52b8 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/sb.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/sb.c > @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static int create_default_filesystem(struct ubifs_info *c) > sup = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_SB_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > mst = kzalloc(c->mst_node_alsz, GFP_KERNEL); > idx_node_size = ubifs_idx_node_sz(c, 1); > - idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > + idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(idx_node_size, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > ino = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_INO_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > cs = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_CS_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > > -- > 2.24.0 > > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | Thanks, Naga Sureshkumar Relli. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 10:53 ` naga suresh kumar @ 2019-12-04 10:08 ` Sascha Hauer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Sascha Hauer @ 2019-12-04 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: naga suresh kumar Cc: Richard Weinberger, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, linux-mtd, Miquel Raynal, Naga Sureshkumar Relli, siva.durga.paladugu On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:23:34PM +0530, naga suresh kumar wrote: > Hi Sascha, > > Tested this patch. and it worked. > Thanks for your quick response. Ok, I take this as a: Tested-by: Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagasure@xilinx.com> Thanks Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 10:45 ` Sascha Hauer 2019-12-03 10:53 ` naga suresh kumar @ 2019-12-03 19:08 ` Richard Weinberger 2019-12-04 7:17 ` Sascha Hauer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Richard Weinberger @ 2019-12-03 19:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Naga Sureshkumar Relli, Richard Weinberger, siva durga paladugu, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, Miquel Raynal, naga suresh kumar, linux-mtd On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 11:46 AM Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:06:12PM +0530, naga suresh kumar wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 2:40 PM Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote: > > > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > > > Von: "Naga Sureshkumar Relli" <nagasure@xilinx.com> > > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > > > we are trying to allocate 4325376 (~4MB) > > > > > > 4MiB? Is ->min_io_size that large? > > if you see https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > The size is actually ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size). > > Here tmp is of 4325376 Bytes and min_io_size is 16384 Bytes > > 'tmp' contains bogus values. Try this: > > ----------------------------8<-------------------------------- > > From 34f687fce189085f55706b4cddcb288a08f4ee06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> > Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:41:20 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] ubifs: Fix wrong memory allocation > > In create_default_filesystem() when we allocate the idx node we must use > the idx_node_size we calculated just one line before, not tmp, which > contains completely other data. > > Fixes: c4de6d7e4319 ("ubifs: Refactor create_default_filesystem()") > Reported-by: Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagasure@xilinx.com> > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> > --- > fs/ubifs/sb.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/sb.c b/fs/ubifs/sb.c > index a551eb3e9b89..6681c18e52b8 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/sb.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/sb.c > @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static int create_default_filesystem(struct ubifs_info *c) > sup = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_SB_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > mst = kzalloc(c->mst_node_alsz, GFP_KERNEL); > idx_node_size = ubifs_idx_node_sz(c, 1); > - idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > + idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(idx_node_size, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > ino = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_INO_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > cs = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_CS_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); Oh, looks good! Thanks for fixing, Sascha! Thanks, //richard ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-03 19:08 ` Richard Weinberger @ 2019-12-04 7:17 ` Sascha Hauer 2019-12-04 9:05 ` Richard Weinberger 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Sascha Hauer @ 2019-12-04 7:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Weinberger Cc: Naga Sureshkumar Relli, Richard Weinberger, siva durga paladugu, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, Miquel Raynal, naga suresh kumar, linux-mtd On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 08:08:48PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 11:46 AM Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:06:12PM +0530, naga suresh kumar wrote: > > > Hi Richard, > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 2:40 PM Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote: > > > > > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > > > > Von: "Naga Sureshkumar Relli" <nagasure@xilinx.com> > > > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > > > > we are trying to allocate 4325376 (~4MB) > > > > > > > > 4MiB? Is ->min_io_size that large? > > > if you see https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/ubifs/sb.c#L164 > > > The size is actually ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size). > > > Here tmp is of 4325376 Bytes and min_io_size is 16384 Bytes > > > > 'tmp' contains bogus values. Try this: > > > > ----------------------------8<-------------------------------- > > > > From 34f687fce189085f55706b4cddcb288a08f4ee06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> > > Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:41:20 +0100 > > Subject: [PATCH] ubifs: Fix wrong memory allocation > > > > In create_default_filesystem() when we allocate the idx node we must use > > the idx_node_size we calculated just one line before, not tmp, which > > contains completely other data. > > > > Fixes: c4de6d7e4319 ("ubifs: Refactor create_default_filesystem()") > > Reported-by: Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagasure@xilinx.com> > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> > > --- > > fs/ubifs/sb.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/sb.c b/fs/ubifs/sb.c > > index a551eb3e9b89..6681c18e52b8 100644 > > --- a/fs/ubifs/sb.c > > +++ b/fs/ubifs/sb.c > > @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static int create_default_filesystem(struct ubifs_info *c) > > sup = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_SB_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > > mst = kzalloc(c->mst_node_alsz, GFP_KERNEL); > > idx_node_size = ubifs_idx_node_sz(c, 1); > > - idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(tmp, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > > + idx = kzalloc(ALIGN(idx_node_size, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > > ino = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_INO_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > > cs = kzalloc(ALIGN(UBIFS_CS_NODE_SZ, c->min_io_size), GFP_KERNEL); > > Oh, looks good! Thanks for fixing, Sascha! Will you apply this one? Otherwise I resend with the proper tags added. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: ubifs mount failure 2019-12-04 7:17 ` Sascha Hauer @ 2019-12-04 9:05 ` Richard Weinberger 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Richard Weinberger @ 2019-12-04 9:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Naga Sureshkumar Relli, Richard Weinberger, siva durga paladugu, linux-kernel, Michal Simek, Miquel Raynal, naga suresh kumar, linux-mtd ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > Von: "Sascha Hauer" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> >> Oh, looks good! Thanks for fixing, Sascha! > > Will you apply this one? Otherwise I resend with the proper tags added. Just checked in patchwork. It is unable to detect the patch, please resend. :-) Thanks, //richard ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-12-04 10:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <MN2PR02MB5727000CBE70BAF31F60FEE4AF420@MN2PR02MB5727.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
2019-12-03 8:41 ` ubifs mount failure Sascha Hauer
2019-12-03 9:00 ` Naga Sureshkumar Relli
2019-12-03 9:10 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-12-03 10:36 ` naga suresh kumar
2019-12-03 10:45 ` Sascha Hauer
2019-12-03 10:53 ` naga suresh kumar
2019-12-04 10:08 ` Sascha Hauer
2019-12-03 19:08 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-12-04 7:17 ` Sascha Hauer
2019-12-04 9:05 ` Richard Weinberger
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).