change in how ubiformat works

Artem Bityutskiy dedekind1 at
Fri Nov 26 10:56:32 EST 2010

On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 13:47 -0500, twebb wrote:
> I use a sequence as follows: " flash_erase - ubiformat - nanddump -
> verify " to confirm that a UBI image was properly stored in NAND
> flash.  I realize that flash_erase is not recommended because it
> destroys erase counters, but this is only done on virgin flash so
> should not be an issue.
> However, I recently upgraded the mtd-utils, and particularly ubiformat
> from 1.4 to 1.5, and now I see that what I read back (via nanddump)
> does not match the original UBI image.  Can anyone confirm whether
> ubiformat.c changes sometime between 1.4 and 1.5 would result in this
> behavior?  I have looked at ubiformat.c changes and am wondering if it
> has to do with image sequence number support.

Try to bisect it and find the commit id which changed the behavior.

Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

More information about the linux-mtd mailing list