From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-fx0-f222.google.com ([209.85.220.222]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1NTuJL-0007QT-EG for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 09:42:19 +0000 Received: by fxm22 with SMTP id 22so23102645fxm.2 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 01:42:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI fails to initialise in kernel update marker From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Peter Horton In-Reply-To: <20100105111436.GA2046@turtle.localnet> References: <20100105111436.GA2046@turtle.localnet> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:42:11 +0200 Message-Id: <1263116531.7315.143.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:14 +0000, Peter Horton wrote: > The in kernel copy of a volume's update marker is not initialised from the > volume table. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Horton > > --- linux-2.6.32.orig/drivers/mtd/ubi/vtbl.c 2010-01-05 10:56:13.000000000 +0000 > +++ linux-2.6.32/drivers/mtd/ubi/vtbl.c 2010-01-05 10:57:03.000000000 +0000 > @@ -566,6 +566,7 @@ > vol->reserved_pebs = be32_to_cpu(vtbl[i].reserved_pebs); > vol->alignment = be32_to_cpu(vtbl[i].alignment); > vol->data_pad = be32_to_cpu(vtbl[i].data_pad); > + vol->upd_marker = vtbl[i].upd_marker; > vol->vol_type = vtbl[i].vol_type == UBI_VID_DYNAMIC ? > UBI_DYNAMIC_VOLUME : UBI_STATIC_VOLUME; > vol->name_len = be16_to_cpu(vtbl[i].name_len); Am I right that this means that whole "forbid using volume with unfinished update" functionality has not worked properly? Or I miss something? Looks like I should send this patch to -stable as well. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)