From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.dave-tech.it ([2.229.21.40]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ZFzbw-0002Ee-A4 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 06:59:09 +0000 Subject: Re: UBIFS: recovery of master node To: Richard Weinberger References: <55A7B004.2090705@dave-tech.it> Cc: mtd_mailinglist From: Andrea Scian Message-ID: <55A8A7A4.906@dave-tech.it> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 08:58:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Il 16/07/2015 17:29, Richard Weinberger ha scritto: > Andrea, > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Andrea Scian wrote: >> >> If I bypass that check too, I can mount UBIFS and everything inside the FS >> is there but, of course, I'm sure I'm doing something that may be wrong.. >> >> WDYT? > > So, you're facing bitflips on empty space? Another UBI/UBIFS "implementation" question: are there some other places, apart from get_master_node(), where UBIFS check empty space corruption and fails badly if something wrong? TIA, -- Andrea SCIAN DAVE Embedded Systems