From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [213.170.72.194] (helo=shelob.oktetlabs.ru) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.43 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1DXfLY-0000IP-Fl for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 16 May 2005 09:09:25 -0400 Message-ID: <42889B68.3070902@yandex.ru> Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 17:08:56 +0400 From: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gianluca References: <200505161329.17406.gianlucarenzi@eptar.com> In-Reply-To: <200505161329.17406.gianlucarenzi@eptar.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: mounting a mtd or a mtblock?? List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , As the first step you may install the last MTD tree from CVS and try it. Can't help with wrong erasesize issue - I think this should be fixed somewhere in the Flash driver level. What does your 'cat /proc/mtd' say? > Why erasing mtd[n] with flash_eraseall command and mounting mtdblock[n] with > mount comand? > Why not erasing mtdblock[n] and mount mtdblock[n] as mount command uses only > BLOCK devices? Is this not completely *TRUE*?? Read about mtd device files in this FAQ: http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/faq/nand.html > > Anyway if I try to launch those commands, here is what system gives to me: > > [ a very long log...] > ... > Empty flash at 0x003de780 ends at 0x003de784 > Empty flash at 0x003dfd3c ends at 0x003dfd40 > jffs2_scan_eraseblock(): Node at 0x003e0000 {0x1985, 0x4e76, 0x7ecf000c) has > invalid CRC 0x59a7b0b1 (calculated 0xa3ed5d51) > jffs2_scan_eraseblock(): Magic bitmask 0x1985 not found at 0x003e0004: 0x000c > instead > Any Help?? Any Clue? Your flash neither contains any right data nor contains all FF. This confuses JFFS2. For some reasons flash_eraseall didn't erase your flash correctly. I think you should dig your Flash diver. -- Best Regards, Artem B. Bityuckiy, St.-Petersburg, Russia.