[PATCH]fs/jffs2/wbuf.c: add compatibility support for OOB data block

[Ferenc Havasi]

Hi Jörn & Artem,

>>No. The task of this condition is to make sure that the summary was 
>>generated correctly. If the summary is generated by the filesystem, it 
>>will be always good, but you are also able to generate summary with the 
>>userspace tool 'sumtool'. If we do not recognise this mistake that can 
>>cause big problems and make the user confused.
>>    
>>
>
>I don't buy this argument.  If 'sumtool' fucks up, it should either be
>fixed or pulled off the net.  There is no excuse for broken code.
>
>At least you need to go into details if you want to convince me.
>  
>
OK, we can remove this check, and field.

I only say that for a user the size of the virtual erase block may not 
be evident. They know about the real erase block size. Maybe we should 
write a tool for calculating it.

It is not too relevant problem without summary. For example if the erase 
block size is 32K, and the virtual is 64K, and you generates JFFS2 
image  for 32K it will work (maybe with some warning but will work). If 
you generates summary for that image for 32K and use it on 64K virtual 
erase block size that will not work.

Bye,
Ferenc