From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.230] helo=mgw-mx03.nokia.com) by casper.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.69 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1MV1fU-0000eN-0U for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:13:32 +0000 Message-ID: <4A6C38F2.1040607@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:07:30 +0300 From: Artem Bityutskiy MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Erno Kuusela Subject: Re: UBIFS fails & crashes on SheevaPlug References: <20090723185928.GA1612@gulp.u--3.com> <4A694C3C.4010108@gmail.com> <20090724131241.GC1792@gulp.u--3.com> In-Reply-To: <20090724131241.GC1792@gulp.u--3.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: debian-arm@lists.debian.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 07/24/2009 04:12 PM, Erno Kuusela wrote: > Also, ubiformat mentioned 1400+ "bad" eraseblocks, what should I make of > that? Is it really failed flash cells, just some blocks reserved for > u-boot and stuff, or blocks traumatized from my earlier misadventures > with ubiformat parameters? Oh, I've just got it. When ubiformat prints: ubiformat: bad eraseblocks: 1400 this means that you have 1 eraseblock, and it is eraseblock number 1400. Nothing to worry about. But it is confusing, so I'll change this to ubiformat: bad eraseblock numbers: A, B, C -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)