From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.64]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1X7Nzi-0005NS-QP for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:07:38 +0000 Message-ID: <53C66ACD.5090508@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 20:06:37 +0800 From: hujianyang MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Subject: Re: ubifs error at boot "bad node type" References: <53BBC39F.7010307@gmail.com> <1405499347.1906.2.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1405499347.1906.2.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Richard Genoud , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Adrian Hunter List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 2014/7/16 16:29, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 12:10 +0200, Richard Genoud wrote: >> ubiattach is ok: >> # ubiattach -m 3 >> [ 50.164062] UBI: default fastmap pool size: 95 >> [ 50.164062] UBI: default fastmap WL pool size: 25 > > I do not know why this happened, I never saw reports like this before. > Most probably this is because of fastmap. I did not hear any report that > it was extensively verified WRT power cuts, and my theory is that there > is a bug in fastmap which causes this, and this may be related to power > cuts. I do not have proves, but suggest you to dig in this direction. > E.g., setup power-cut testing. > My colleague who use UBIFS with kernel v2.6.34(WR4?) hit an error like this: UBIFS error (pid 0): ubifs_read_node: bad node type (255 but expected 0) UBIFS error (pid 0): ubifs_read_node: bad node at LEB 112:67824, LEB mapping status 1 UBIFS error (pid 0): ubifs_iget: failed to read inode 1, error -22 He said he was running UBIFS for 3 years and would hit this error about one time per year. I googled these error messages and found some same reports in 2010~2012. So I think this problem is fixed by early fixes, I asked him to backport this patch set [PATCH 00/13] UBI reliability improvements but I'm sure of that. After this error report, I was worrying about this bug still left.