From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [67.215.48.194] (helo=koko.iders.ca) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1P4HIp-00077l-15 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:04:19 +0000 Received: from [172.16.22.4] (zen.iders.ca [172.16.22.4]) by koko.iders.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C681C45002E for ; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 13:26:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <4CAF5D21.2050103@iders.ca> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 13:04:17 -0500 From: Andrew McKay MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: JFFS2 Summary warnings on large block NAND device Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hello, I've been using JFFS2 for a little while now, and I'm just going through the warning and error messages that JFFS2 sometimes reports to see if we have any issues with our system. We've moved to a new NAND part from Micron that has 4K pages and 512K erase blocks and I'm getting some new warnings from JFFS2 that I've never seen before and am wondering if I have an issue. Here's the three messages I'm worried about: JFFS2 warning: (1) jffs2_sum_scan_sumnode: Summary node crc error, skipping summary information. JFFS2 warning: (633) jffs2_sum_write_data: Summary too big (-32 data, -2794 pad) in eraseblock at 27b80000 JFFS2 warning: (739) jffs2_sum_write_data: Not enough space for summary, padsize = -1324 Presumably, these messages are all related and are because summary information is limited to 64K so that kmalloc can be used for allocation. With the larger sized erase block I assume that the summary information is often exceeding 64K. Should I be worried about these messages? As far as I understand summary information is only used so that JFFS2 can mount quickly. Without it mount times will be a bit longer as it has to scan each page in the device instead of the summary page at the end of the erase block. Is there a fix for this issue? Admittedly my kernel is a little old. 2.6.30.9, so I may not have the most up to date JFFS2 code. Though I did some searching online and I haven't found mention of solution to this problem, or if it is something that I should be concerned about. Thanks for your time -- Andrew McKay IDERS Inc.