From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [81.3.11.18] (helo=mail.ku-gbr.de) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.43 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1D9iIl-0005QQ-ML for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 06:27:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:27:30 +0100 From: Konstantin Kletschke To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Message-ID: <20050311112730.GC11203@synertronixx3> References: <20050311104457.GB11203@synertronixx3> <42317DD7.3090205@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42317DD7.3090205@yandex.ru> Subject: Re: jffs2 with sync burst mode List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Am 2005-03-11 14:15 +0300 schrieb Artem B. Bityuckiy: > Konstantin Kletschke wrote: > > The "Name CRC failed on node at ..." is away. I populated the root-fs > Good. But is moving the memcpy function a valid fix? There must be something really wrong which should be fixed :/ DCache corruption i.e. missing invalidating at the right time? > > > root-fs. No problems. But mounting takes ages :) > How much time does "ages" mean ? > Do you stand that it was faster before? Sorry, my apologies! CONFIG_MTD_DEBUG_VERBOSE was on 2, on 0 I get reasonable mount time again, I am very sorry for misleading you! > How large is your flash? 16MB, the root-fs is 5MB... > Do you have directories with huge files number in it (say, ~ 10000)? No. > A: This means that flash_eraseall ought to write special node called > cleanmarker at the beginning of each block. > If you are sure that the problem is not your slow flash driver, you > might try Ferenc's "summary" patch. But if I understood correct the not created-cleanmarkers-by-bootloader problem is "solved" on second boot? I see this here also, the 1st mount takes ages, the following are fast. Regards, sorry, Konstantin -- GPG KeyID EF62FCEF Fingerprint: 13C9 B16B 9844 EC15 CC2E A080 1E69 3FDA EF62 FCEF