From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66CC12C3276 for ; Sat, 8 Nov 2025 03:10:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.188 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762571429; cv=none; b=PVIvaaQQL0ZZqRa3AUXM66U9II2e9yZKxf4CaG2mJzIsBGn3ctc1vsVEbyO83V2gw3oCWSOhqkLZkBYUHo80LbFitX9nQIVSg6VZ41iPVxXGkCAeskKjh65frmm7Wn9VUuZhwKahn1kSFnXfUkiqHurIpUWvn4zccOFcZEcPgUc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762571429; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mQqbWGVOOQaCHo+JyHm75c1MG7ch0SoVA7iY4uQf16M=; h=Subject:From:To:References:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=h3BZdP/V1XM6qYVGoknMYaYREGyDpOBnhz4zXz6/HPDSnqDtKHA1nuSYLqrij5YpSQODfbJdZLHZtdmmHlnPvAre/w7jcMIodotPFCzCBD3YvTTTdalvcDFTR00ZxIGQhGHMiKU7ITWslIvfxQgiK41+QDZ61ace0aQUA8nKyp4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b=3JB5MYKt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.188 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b="3JB5MYKt" Received: from canpmsgout07.his.huawei.com (unknown [172.19.92.160]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4d3LQh0hRdzThBT for ; Sat, 8 Nov 2025 11:05:32 +0800 (CST) dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=huawei.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=fWTb2pOcM9CXmYC6UdWot4dWCYfXpxLg0tPmGPgdwak=; b=3JB5MYKtzMDOEFTMGqRYCsUNmJnLgQLHT8NUaT/G2qYNOfCyLO/TgCL7udDTHyLBDIFdzqsmv rx4WV+baK74czTdS+9ZPXLRcqlK0tAmZxI5m1Tk7tqKt9/XLS4ieYqRUM7ve3nXgVyfbKrOJlpg /Px2qfkM5/JwdsDW1ZqfVCU= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.112]) by canpmsgout07.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4d3LV837zKzLlSX; Sat, 8 Nov 2025 11:08:32 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemk500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.194.90]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F17B7140142; Sat, 8 Nov 2025 11:10:08 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.178.46] (10.174.178.46) by kwepemk500005.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.90) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Sat, 8 Nov 2025 11:10:07 +0800 Subject: Re: UBIFS errors since Linux 5.15 From: Zhihao Cheng To: Eddie James , , , , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , , References: <068ba254-0053-46d5-bff4-74c948d2e8ac@linux.ibm.com> <183bacc4-3e27-59a7-ceb5-0bcac7d566e9@huawei.com> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2025 11:10:07 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <183bacc4-3e27-59a7-ceb5-0bcac7d566e9@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems200001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.67) To kwepemk500005.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.90) 在 2025/11/8 11:03, Zhihao Cheng 写道: > 在 2025/11/8 1:38, Eddie James 写道: >> >> Hello, >> >> We are updating some BMC (Aspeed AST2600, ARM32) systems that were on >> Linux 5.4 but observe consistent UBIFS errors with Linux 5.15 and >> later. The errors seem to vary; there is a sampling below. >> >> >> We performed a git bisect and came up with the following commit, which >> of course is completely unrelated to UBIFS. Reverting it does prevent >> the issue... Does anyone have any suggestions? >> >> commit 33fc9e26b7cb39f0d4219c875a2451802249c225 > [...] >> [    8.180486] UBIFS error (ubi0:2 pid 66): ubifs_check_node: bad >> magic 0x101831, expected 0x6101831 > > Hi, look here, the magic number 0x101831 vs 0x6101831, the difference is > the highest bit(0 vs 6[0110]) >> [    8.189578] UBIFS error (ubi0:2 pid 66): ubifs_check_node: bad node >> at LEB 17:64664 > > [...] >> [ 3739.678968] UBIFS error (ubi0:2 pid 13): ubifs_check_node: bad CRC: >> calculated 0x9179af29, read 0xa760f4f5 > > [...] >> [10412.723111] UBIFS error (ubi0:2 pid 297): ubifs_check_node: bad >> magic 0x6100830, expected 0x6101831 > > and there, magic number 0x6100830 vs 0x6101831, the difference is lowest > bit(0 vs 1). Sorry, I need to make a correction, the differences are the lowest bit(0 vs 1) and the middle bit (0 vs 1). The number of flipped bits is also two. > > So, I guess the crc error is caused by the similar reason, maybe there > is something wrong with the nand driver or flash? According to the > version information(5.15, and the unrelated commit 33fc9e26b7cb3), is it > possible that there is a compatibility issue between your nand(bsp) > driver with kernel nand common layer(which from different versions)? > >> [10412.732436] UBIFS error (ubi0:2 pid 297): ubifs_check_node: bad >> node at LEB 13:60248 > > > ______________________________________________________ > Linux MTD discussion mailing list > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/