Hello Michael,
Michael Lawnick wrote:
> I have put these patches to our board (MPC8548, NOR Flash, MTD partition
> size 48MB).
>
> a) performance has improved (execution time of 'ls' reduced from ~16s to
> ~1.5s)
>
Sounds good. That is what we were expecting.
> b) there is a bug in the patch
> 0005-jffs2-add-buffer-to-cache-flash-accesses:
> The passage
>
> @@ -724,12 +731,14 @@ jffs2_1pass_read_inode(struct b_lists *pL, u32
> inode, char *dest)
> latestVersion = jNode->version;
> }
> }
> - put_fl_mem(jNode);
> + if (pL->readbuf == NULL)
> + put_fl_mem(jNode);
> }
> #endif
>
> should be
>
> @@ -724,12 +731,14 @@ jffs2_1pass_read_inode(struct b_lists *pL, u32
> inode, char *dest)
> latestVersion = jNode->version;
> }
> }
> - put_fl_mem(jNode);
> + if (pL->readbuf == NULL)
> + put_fl_mem(jNode, NULL);
> }
> #endif
>
You are right. We haven't just tried to use CFG_JFFS2_SORT_FRAGMENTS...
> c) I found no improvement with CFG_JFFS2_SORT_FRAGMENTS set (the way I
> detected b) ;-)
>
Same as above... We don't use CFG_JFFS2_SORT_FRAGMENTS... But it's very
sad result really... I have no idea what is wrong with it...
> d) output of 'ls' is corrupted: no date and access right output,
> directories in / are shown multiple times
Can you please be more specific on this? Is this with
CFG_JFFS2_SORT_FRAGMENTS enabled or not? How did you create your FS? I
can't reproduce any of described symptoms on our system...
The only thing I can tell you for now is that the first patch from my
posting is wrong, the following patch fixes the problem:
>From 38d2055f7b493af858c96d1db2aa5cef78adeae1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ilya Yanok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:22:35 +0200
Subject: jffs2: fix sector_size calculation in case of NOR flash
Need to take all sectors into account then calculating sector_size
for NOR flashes.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Yanok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
common/cmd_jffs2.c | 9 ++++++---
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/cmd_jffs2.c b/common/cmd_jffs2.c
index e7f07bf..2fc0b7d 100644
--- a/common/cmd_jffs2.c
+++ b/common/cmd_jffs2.c
@@ -344,7 +344,9 @@ static int part_validate_nor(struct mtdids *id,
struct part_info *part)
flash = &flash_info[id->num];
- part->sector_size = 0;
+ /* size of last sector */
+ part->sector_size = flash->size -
+ (flash->start[flash->sector_count-1] - flash->start[0]);
offset_aligned = 0;
for (i = 0; i < flash->sector_count; i++) {
@@ -360,6 +362,7 @@ static int part_validate_nor(struct mtdids *id,
struct part_info *part)
}
end_offset = part->offset + part->size;
+ offset_aligned = 0;
for (i = 0; i < flash->sector_count; i++) {
if (i) {
sector_size = flash->start[i] - flash->start[i-1];
@@ -367,10 +370,10 @@ static int part_validate_nor(struct mtdids *id,
struct part_info *part)
part->sector_size = sector_size;
}
if ((flash->start[i] - flash->start[0]) == end_offset)
- return 0;
+ offset_aligned = 1;
}
- if (flash->size == end_offset)
+ if (offset_aligned || flash->size == end_offset)
return 0;
printf("%s%d: partition (%s) size alignment incorrect\n",
--
1.5.6.1
You can try it. But I think the only affected case is summary enabled FS
which is rather rare.
Regards, Ilya.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
