From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.sigma-star.at ([95.130.255.111]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ePA73-00041c-EM for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 16:42:31 +0000 From: Richard Weinberger To: Jaap de Jong Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: Mounting issue with old uboot and new rootfs Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:42:37 +0100 Message-ID: <1850520.5cNxzxR8i7@blindfold> In-Reply-To: <548ecb18-722c-f919-b245-d1b1c15c1697@nedap.com> References: <5001344.Umix9c0TK6@blindfold> <548ecb18-722c-f919-b245-d1b1c15c1697@nedap.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Am Mittwoch, 13. Dezember 2017, 11:18:02 CET schrieb Jaap de Jong: > > Does everything work as expected if you don't set the resize flag in > > ubinize? Maybe this is the culprit. > > Yes, that was my last experiment and that works. It turns off the code > in the old uboot that modifies the volume in such a way that the new > kernel is not able to deal with it. > The strange thing is, that an old kernel doesn't mind. Can you please rule out U-Boot first? IOW don't attach UBI from U-Boot and load the kernel via TFTP/NFS, etc... I'm still not sure whether this is a regression in Linux or U-Boot. Thanks, //richard