From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [149.6.83.202] (helo=toronto.xi-lite.net) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1HmPPs-0003kZ-VF for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 03:19:55 -0400 Message-ID: <46441839.2020004@parrot.com> Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 09:16:09 +0200 From: Matthieu CASTET MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dedekind@infradead.org Subject: Re: NAND flash write goes wrong References: <200705102150.31171.borasah@gmail.com> <1178866648.3643.7.camel@sauron> In-Reply-To: <1178866648.3643.7.camel@sauron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Linux mtd List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Artem, Artem Bityutskiy a écrit : > Just FYI, > > we have recently fixed a bug in MTD which caused JFFS2 to mark good > eraseblocks bad. It was caused by the mtdpart module. One had to have > partitions to trigger this bug. The bug was that when JFFS2 wanted to > mark eraseblock X within its partition as bad, mtdpart did not translate > correctly to the _absolute_ number, but marked _absolute_ eraseblock > number X as bad instead. > > So basically, once one met a true bad eraseblock, JFFS2 started trying > to mark it as bad, but marked other eraseblock as bad instead. > > I'd recommend everybody to backport this fix. > Could you give a link to your fix ? Thanks Matthieu