From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:50:43 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] need smaller filesystem for NOR In-Reply-To: <511A7C8E.9010407@mind.be> References: <1360344317.17385.31.camel@genx.eng.msli.com> <20130208183807.2b2fe572@skate> <1360359245.28641.79.camel@genx.eng.msli.com> <1360628370.13529.110.camel@genx> <511A7C8E.9010407@mind.be> Message-ID: <20130212225043.4ecc0f25@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Arnout Vandecappelle, On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:31:58 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > A jffs2 filesystem should be mounted through /dev/mtdN, not through > /dev/mtdblockN. So root=/dev/mtd13 is a better idea. Really? I've always used root=/dev/mtdblockX without any problems. Your statement even seems to contradict http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/faq/jffs2.html#L_mtdblock : """ There are two cases where this does not work. The first is when JFFS2 is used as a root filesystem. For now, this requires the mtdblock device to be specified for root= on the kernel command line. The second case is when the mount binary that is being used does not play nicely with the above format. The BusyBox version of mount is known to not work without the mtdblock device. """ > > Next I tried to edit my jffs options in the .config for my recovery > > 'failsafe' buildroot: > > Filesystem images ---> > > [*] jffs2 root filesystem > > Flash Type (Select custom page and erase size) ---> > > (0x1065) Page Size > > (0xC60) Erase block size > > Those numbers are unlikely. 0x1065 is a very odd number (literally). > Also, the erase block size is always larger than the page size, and for > NOR I think it's normally equal to it. I remember dataflash having bizarre erase block sizes, but I don't think it was an odd number. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com