[U-Boot] UBIFS fails on SheevaPlug

[Dimax]

HI guys.
I'm sorry I had other jobs to do and did not have time to dig it.
I have tried SheevaPlug port from
http://people.debian.org/~tbm/u-boot/2012.04.01-2/
and it fails and gave me no error code. Not sure it is because of old
version or error just did not happen.

I still keep a box with broken ubifs to try new u-boot on it.
Is where any chance someone will help me to build a latest u-boot port for
SheevaPlug?
Actually someone is doing it. I took latest version here:
http://people.debian.org/~tbm/u-boot/2012.04.01-2/

Also can you tell me if this version has error printing patch or not?


On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Vikram Narayanan <vikram186 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello Andreas,
>
>
> On 10/31/2012 10:20 PM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
>
>> Dear Vikram Narayanan,
>>
>> On 31.10.2012 17:27, Vikram Narayanan wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Andreas,
>>>
>>> On 10/30/2012 4:32 AM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Vikram Narayanan,
>>>>
>>>> first of all you are right. u-boot ubifs implementation will never
>>>> recover the ubifs on media, cause it is mounted read only.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>  calls sget() (line 1043)
>>>> which in turn calls kzalloc() (line 67)
>>>> which may return -ENOMEM
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree. But in Dimax's case this isn't. Right?
>>>
>>
>> I dunno cause he has an old version which do not print the error code
>> (patch f75325e1927398f7e18e15f186b1fc**52174cc19f is missing).
>>
>>  But u-boot will manage to get the data out of the unordered ubifs (if no
>>>> error like this ENOMEM occur). That is the same process as in kernel if
>>>> it is mounted read-only (recovery deferred).
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can't comment on this, unless I know the specifics.
>>>
>>
>> Please read mount_ubifs() in fs/ubifs/super.c:582
>>
>> Even if it is mounted read only and recovery is needed it will
>> ubifs_lpt_init(), ubifs_replay_journal(), ubifs_mount_orphans(), ...
>> If recovery is needed it will ubifs_recover_size() and if it is mounted
>> read only it will print at last 'recovery deferred' (in the other case
>> it would be still repaired here cause the steps before do it).
>> So at least a read only fs which needs recovery can be successfully
>> mounted (if no other error occurs; the most likely error is a ENOMEM
>> cause the ubifs does a lot of k(z)alloc).
>>
>
> Thanks. I'll look at this.
>
>
>  So if the kernel can manage to mount the unordered ubifs u-boot should
>>>> do so. If it can't (but the kernel can) there is an error that should be
>>>> fixed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But in the kernel, the read-only isn't hardcoded. So, the kernel code
>>> can try to recover and even update the corrupted data back to the media
>>> and mount it. (It's my guess. The kernel may/mayn't do this way).
>>>
>>
>> Well bootargs can have 'ro' so the root partition will be mounted read
>> only, wouldn't it? Wouldn't this 'ro' root partition not mounted by the
>> kernel then?
>>
>
> Got your point here. Then no feature could be claimed as 'missing' in the
> u-boot's ubifs compared to the kernel's, except for the well known fact
> that u-boot's ubi layer is old code.
>
> Regards,
> Vikram
>