mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com>
To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org,
	"Daniel Krüger" <daniel.krueger@systec-electronic.com>
Subject: Re: UBIFS recovery fails in barebox while Linux suceeds
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 08:16:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9617410.tHQtcjn6HO@ws-stein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160302195613.GU9224@pengutronix.de>

On Wednesday 02 March 2016 20:56:13, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 05:19:08PM +0100, Alexander Stein wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > in case a UBIFS needs recovery (unclean write or whatever on NOR
> > flash) it is possible that barebox fails to do so while Linux suceeds.
> > The main cause, IMHO, is that Linux takes max_write_size into account
> > (starting with commit 2765df7da540687c4d57ca840182122f074c5b9c "UBIFS:
> > use max_write_size during recovery") while barebox doesn't. Apparently
> > is_last_write (fs/ubifs/recovery.c) results differently due to that
> > fact which explains why recovery progress differently. I don't know
> > which linux version the ubifs code in barebox is taken from but I
> > guess this needs to be updated. Are there any plans?
> 
> The barebox UBIFS code is taken from U-Boot 2013.07 which is taken from
> Linux-2.6.29-rc6, so indeed the code is quite old. U-Boot has updated
> UBIFS support to Linux-4.2. The question is if we update UBIFS from
> U-Boot or directly from the Kernel, I have no idea which way is easier.

I still wonder if this problem should have been avoided in the first place. It seems like the change in the kernel is like chaning the on-disk-format.

> Currently there are no plans to update UBIFS, but of course you are
> invited to create them ;)

I expected an answer like that ;-) I did a quick compare and there are a lot of changes in barebox upon the code taken from u-boot. AFAICS those are not documented :(

Best regards,
Alexander
-- 
Dipl.-Inf. Alexander Stein
SYS TEC electronic GmbH
alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com

Legal and Commercial Address:
Am Windrad 2
08468 Heinsdorfergrund
Germany

Office: +49 (0) 3765 38600-0
Fax:    +49 (0) 3765 38600-4100
 
Managing Directors:
	Director Technology/CEO: Dipl.-Phys. Siegmar Schmidt;
	Director Commercial Affairs/COO: Dipl. Ing. (FH) Armin von Collrepp
Commercial Registry:
	Amtsgericht Chemnitz, HRB 28082; USt.-Id Nr. DE150534010


_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-03  7:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-02 16:19 Alexander Stein
2016-03-02 19:56 ` Sascha Hauer
2016-03-03  7:16   ` Alexander Stein [this message]
2016-03-03  8:28     ` Sascha Hauer
2016-03-03  8:38       ` Alexander Stein
2016-03-03  9:23         ` Sascha Hauer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=9617410.tHQtcjn6HO@ws-stein \
    --to=alexander.stein@systec-electronic.com \
    --cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=daniel.krueger@systec-electronic.com \
    --cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox