From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143] helo=radon.swed.at)
 by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
 id 1XElFD-0007V4-Jl
 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 20:22:05 +0000
Message-ID: <53E13CD2.6010000@nod.at>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 22:21:38 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Christoph Mammitzsch <Christoph.Mammitzsch@symeo.com>
Subject: Re: Disappearing directories (jffs2 on nand flash)
References: <53B6DDA2.7000508@symeo.com>	<53C56392.2070306@symeo.com>	<53DD3A45.7000802@symeo.com>
 <CAFLxGvx2s0dZeRUruhQUPQAVDUrdMTFY7bPCH2-2D6Kg4Lv9bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <53E0A239.8060209@symeo.com>
In-Reply-To: <53E0A239.8060209@symeo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list <linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>

Am 05.08.2014 11:22, schrieb Christoph Mammitzsch:
> Am 03.08.2014 01:13, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
>> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Christoph Mammitzsch
>> <Christoph.Mammitzsch@symeo.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I am a little astonished at the amount of feedback I got for my
>>> bugreport. Apparently jffs2 losing entire directories is not as big a
>>> deal as I thought. Does that mean that JFFS2 is dead and I should use
>>> another flash filesystem instead, or did I simply post on the wrong
>>> mailing list?
>>
>> Is there any reason why you are not using UBIFS?
> 
> We introduced our first linux based product 2006, so UBIFS was not an
> option. Our second linux based product was designed in 2011. Back then
> UBIFS was still relatively new, and it seemed beneficial to keep
> differences between our two products minimal, so we kept using JFFS2.
> 
> Switching to UBIFS now means we would have to update and test quite a
> lot of scripts. And providing an update for existing stations would be
> even more problematic. Therefore I was hoping for a bugfix, so we could
> just deliver a new kernel image and be done with it.

I can understand your decisions.
TBH jffs2 is more of less abandoned, don't expect anyone to fix issues fast.

Is the issue you see a regression?
If you can find the first bad commit it might give someone a hint...
git bisect will help you.

Thanks,
//richard