EBH question 1

EBH question 1

[Artem B. Bityutskiy]

Zhao,

did JFFS2 work in your test in this case:

1. flash_eraseall -j /dev/mtd0
flash_eraseall is *old*, it puts cleanmarkers and is not EBH-aware.

2. mount jffs2
3. copy any file to jffs2
4. unmount
5. mount

?

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityutskiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.

Re: EBH question 1

[zhao, forrest]

On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 17:12 +0300, Artem B. Bityutskiy wrote:
> Zhao,
> 
> did JFFS2 work in your test in this case:
> 
> 1. flash_eraseall -j /dev/mtd0
> flash_eraseall is *old*, it puts cleanmarkers and is not EBH-aware.
> 
> 2. mount jffs2
> 3. copy any file to jffs2
> 4. unmount
> 5. mount
> 
> ?
> 

Yes, it can work. I have tested before checking in the patch.
In particular it handled the eraseblocks with cleanmarker by
the old way and cleanmarker is replaced by EBH after an erase
operation happened to an eraseblock.


Thanks,
Forrest

Re: EBH question 1

[Artem B. Bityutskiy]

zhao, forrest wrote:
> Yes, it can work. I have tested before checking in the patch.
> In particular it handled the eraseblocks with cleanmarker by
> the old way and cleanmarker is replaced by EBH after an erase
> operation happened to an eraseblock.
> 
Now it doesn't work :-(

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityutskiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.

Re: EBH question 1

[zhao, forrest]

Hi, Artem

The following is what I do in my lab:
1 download MTD snapshot of 2005/10/30(the
snapshot before I check in EBH patch)
2 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
3 make; make modules_install
4 modprobe mtdram
5 cd util/; make
6 ./flash_eraseall -j /dev/mtd0
Then kernel panic happened, seemed there's a bug
in mtd_char code.

So I use another way to do the test:
1 download MTD snapshot of 2005/10/30(the
snapshot before I check in EBH patch)
2 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
3 make; make modules_install
4 modprobe mtdram
5 mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock0 /mnt
6 copy two files to /mnt
7 umount /mnt
8 download MTD snapshot of 2005/11/10(the
snapshot with EBH patch)
9 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
10 make; make modules_install
11 mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock0 /mnt
12 the previously copied two files are still there
13 run ltp fs test on /mnt
14 nothing wrong happened, no error report

May I know what happened at your side?

Thanks,
Forrest

Re: EBH question 1

[zhao, forrest]

On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 14:26 +0800, zhao, forrest wrote:
> Hi, Artem
> 
> The following is what I do in my lab:
> 1 download MTD snapshot of 2005/10/30(the
> snapshot before I check in EBH patch)
> 2 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
> 3 make; make modules_install
> 4 modprobe mtdram
> 5 cd util/; make
> 6 ./flash_eraseall -j /dev/mtd0
> Then kernel panic happened, seemed there's a bug
> in mtd_char code.
> 
> So I use another way to do the test:
> 1 download MTD snapshot of 2005/10/30(the
> snapshot before I check in EBH patch)
> 2 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
> 3 make; make modules_install
> 4 modprobe mtdram
> 5 mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock0 /mnt
> 6 copy two files to /mnt
> 7 umount /mnt
> 8 download MTD snapshot of 2005/11/10(the
> snapshot with EBH patch)
Sorry for the typo, this should be 2005/12/10
instead of 2005/11/10
> 9 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
> 10 make; make modules_install
> 11 mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock0 /mnt
> 12 the previously copied two files are still there
> 13 run ltp fs test on /mnt
> 14 nothing wrong happened, no error report
> 
> May I know what happened at your side?
> 
> Thanks,
> Forrest
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________
> Linux MTD discussion mailing list
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

Re: EBH question 1

[Jarkko Lavinen]

Zhao

I tried CVS head (Dec 12).  I used 2.6.14.3 on x86 and Nandsim.  2.6.14
requires removal of the second NULL argument (parent) to class_device_create() 
call to make it work.

I erased the partition with flash_eraseall (I tried both -j and without).
I mounted the partition, copied big file (libc) onto it, unmounted, and then
mounted again.

All messaged are directed to console, When I mount the file system
again, I get:

  # mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock0 /mnt
  ...
  Dec 13 12:53:15 slayer kernel: Node at 0x00001e30 with length 0x000008e0 would run over the end of the erase block 
  Dec 13 12:53:15 slayer kernel: Perhaps the file system was created with the wrong erase size? Reject to mount.
  Dec 13 12:53:15 slayer kernel: [JFFS2 DBG] (3602) jffs2_do_mount_fs: build_fs failed
  mount: /dev/mtdblock0: can't read superblock

I can reproduce the same problem on an Arm based test board with 
2.6.15-rc4 with Nandsim and Onenandsim. On 2.6.15 class_device_create()
call works out of the box and no editing is needed.

Jarkko Lavinn

Re: JFFS2 CVS broken after 2005/11/14

[Artem Bityutskiy]

zhao, forrest wrote:

>Hi, Artem
>
>I would change the mail subject to avoid the confusion.
>
>I did a lot of regression test today.......
>1 I checked in the EBH patch on 2005/11/04, so I checked out
>CVS snapshot of 2005/11/05. It works very well.
>2 I checked in the 1:1 mapping patch on 2005/11/11, so I checked
>out CVS snapshot of 2005/11/12. It works very well.
>3 I checked out CVS snapshot of 2005/11/13. It works very well.
>4 I checked out CVS snapshot of 2005/11/14. There're error 
>messages like the below posted by Jarkko.
>  
>
Actually even without that patch JFFS2 doesn't work. I don't know which 
regression tests you did, but JFFS2 fails to do simle a thing:

mount
copy a file
unmount
mount

and it is reproducable on nandsim.

Artem.

Re: JFFS2 CVS broken after 2005/11/14

[zhao, forrest]

> >
> Actually even without that patch JFFS2 doesn't work. I don't know which 
> regression tests you did, but JFFS2 fails to do simle a thing:
> 
> mount
> copy a file
> unmount
> mount
> 
> and it is reproducable on nandsim.

Yes, I reproduced the bug for CVS snapshot after 2005/11/14
on kernel 2.6.12.2.
For snapshot before 2005/11/14 on kernel 2.6.12.2,
JFFS2 works fine.
I just got 2.6.15-rc5 and will do the same test later.

Thanks,
Forrest

Re: EBH question 1

[Artem B. Bityutskiy]

zhao, forrest wrote:
> Hi, Artem
> 
> The following is what I do in my lab:
> 1 download MTD snapshot of 2005/10/30(the
> snapshot before I check in EBH patch)
Thanks, I know that it worked before EBH. Could you please take the 
*lates* CVS stanpshot. Try this on nandsim.

> 2 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
> 3 make; make modules_install
> 4 modprobe mtdram
> 5 cd util/; make
> 6 ./flash_eraseall -j /dev/mtd0
> Then kernel panic happened, seemed there's a bug
> in mtd_char code.
I've fixed this revently.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityutskiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.

Re: EBH question 1

[zhao, forrest]

> 
> > 2 ./patchkernel.sh -c -2 /usr/src/linux.2.6.12.2
> > 3 make; make modules_install
> > 4 modprobe mtdram
> > 5 cd util/; make
> > 6 ./flash_eraseall -j /dev/mtd0
> > Then kernel panic happened, seemed there's a bug
> > in mtd_char code.
> I've fixed this revently.
> 

Today I tried to build mtd latest CVS snapshot on kernel
2.6.15-rc5, but got the following error message:

WARNING: /lib/modules/2.6.15-rc5/kernel/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.ko
needs unknown symbol mtd_class_device_create

I grep the whole kernel source tree, but no other files
have the definition of mtd_class_device_create.

Did I miss something?

Thanks,
Forrest  

Re: JFFS2 after CVS snapshot 2005/11/13 is broken on nandsim

[zhao, forrest]

On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 15:01 +0300, Artem B. Bityutskiy wrote:
> zhao, forrest wrote:
> > Hi, Artem
> > 
> > The following is what I do in my lab:
> > 1 download MTD snapshot of 2005/10/30(the
> > snapshot before I check in EBH patch)
> Thanks, I know that it worked before EBH. Could you please take the 
> *lates* CVS stanpshot. Try this on nandsim.
> 
Today I did the regression test on kernel 2.6.15-rc5 again,
the result is the same as the one on kernel 2.6.12.2.
The test steps are:
1 mount /dev/mtdblock0 to /mnt, which is a nandsim partition
2 copy a small file(2755 bytes) to /mnt
3 umount /mnt
4 mount /dev/mtdblock0 again 

The CVS snapshot before 2005/11/13 is good; the snapshot after
2005/11/13 is broken. I checked in EBH patch on 2005/11/04, so
this is not a bug in EBH. Anyway I'll take look at the diff
between 2005/11/12 and 2005/11/13 to find the bug out.

For snapshot before 2005/11/13, I also did some stress test
on /mnt, it works very well.

For snapshot after 2005/11/13, kernel panic can be easily
reproduced by copying a small file. 

Thanks,
Forrest