On 05/16/10 23:02, Charles Manning wrote:
> On Monday 17 May 2010 01:09:27 yaffs@piments.com wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have been using 2.6.29 patched to yaffs2 and it works fine.
>>
>> I am now trying to move to 2.6.32.11 , all is well except yaffs.
>>
>> Booting via nfs I have one fs image for *29 and another for *32
>>
>> Booting to *29 I can mount /dev/mntblock1 , it is clean and df shows
>> correct values.
>>
>> # mount -t yaffs /dev/mtdblock1 /mnt/tmp
>> yaffs: dev is 32505857 name is "mtdblock1"
>> yaffs: passed flags ""
>> yaffs: Attempting MTD mount on 31.1, "mtdblock1"
>> yaffs: auto selecting yaffs2
>> Partially written block 513 detected
>> Partially written block 513 detected
>> Partially written block 513 detected
>> ...
>> /dev/mtdblock1 on /mnt/tmp type yaffs (rw)
>> # df -h
>> Filesystem Size Used Available Use% Mounted on
>> /dev/root 4.1G 3.6G 319.6M 92% /
>> tmpfs 64.0K 0 64.0K 0% /dev
>> /dev/mtdblock1 125.0M 34.2M 90.8M 27% /mnt/tmp
>>
>>
>>
>> Booting from *32 when I try to mount /dev/mtdblock1 I get a shitload of
>> tragedy.
>>
>> # mount -t yaffs2 /dev/mtdblock1 /tmp/mnt
>> ...
>> **>> Block 972 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 973 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 974 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 975 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 976 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 977 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 978 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 979 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 980 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 981 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 982 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 983 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 984 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 985 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 986 needs retiring
>> **>> Block 987 needs retiring
>> !!!!!!!!! Allocator out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> yaffs tragedy: no more erased blocks
>> !!!!!!!!! Allocator out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> yaffs tragedy: no more erased blocks
>> !!!!!!!!! Allocator out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> yaffs_read_super: isCheckpointed 0
>> ...
>>
>> I've checked the two .config files have the same yaffs options
>>
>>
>> This is rather reminiscent of the case where I moved from 2.4 to 2.6
>> where I had similar types of problems and had to erase_all and install a
>> new fs. Since the older kernel was years old and it was a major update I
>> deemed this was acceptable and cleared the whole fs. Now it seems less
>> normal.
>>
>> Is this something I am doing wrong or is there no attempt to keep yaffs2
>> stable across kernel versions, even minor updates?
>>
>
> This is happening because yaffs is seeing write errors. If every block has
> write errors and needs to be retired then eventually there are no usable
> blocks.
>
> This is almost certainly a change in the way mtd is handling the oob data.
>
> What happens if you erase the flash before mounting it?
>
> Have a detailed look at the way mtd oob data is being handled.
>
> -- Charles
>
>
>
Thanks Charles,
I have checked that the .config MTD options are the same in the two
kernels. So, is what you're saying that this is almost certainly coming
from changes in the way the kernel mtd code handles oob ?
Is this likely to be finger trouble on my part or is it to be expected
that the code will not be stable from one kernel release to another?
Specifically from 2.6.29 to 2.6.32
The main purpose of yaffs is reduce flash wear. Mounting the mtd block
device is a means of testing the kernel before committing to using it.
I will very likely erase_all and install the new fs when I commit. What
I don't want to do is erase it , burn the fs , find a problem , erase it
burn the old fs as a test cycle then start again.
I can't allow myself to get distracted into debugging the kernel mtd
handlers , what I need to know is whether this a sign that something is
badly wrong with this jaffs on this build or whether this is to be
expected when trying to mount a block created by an earlier kernel.
Are you able to comment on that?
Thanks.
(text/plain)