Re: Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- From: "Voidcoder" <voidcoder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:55:26 -0700
Try to add this entry:
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\StorageManager\Profiles\MSFlash]
"Paging"=dword:0
"Hans" <hans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:%23lRjc1xoFHA.3916@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Following are the Storage Manager Profile Settings
> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\StorageManager\Profiles\MSFlash]
> "Name"="FLASH Disk Block Device"
> "Folder"="NANDFlash"
> "AutoMount"=dword:1
> "AutoPart"=dword:1
> "AutoFormat"=dword:1
> "MountFlags"=dword:0
> "FileSystem"="fatfsd.dll"
> "PartitionDriver"="mspart.dll"
> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\StorageManager\Profiles\MSFlash\FATFS]
> ; Override common setting to enable automatic formatting of unformatted
> volumes
> "Flags"=dword:00000024
>
>
> "Voidcoder" <voidcoder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:%239kGZnxoFHA.1412@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Post your storage manager profile settings
>> from registry, probably something is wrong
>> there.
>>
>>
>> "Hans" <hans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:ekdkvgxoFHA.3828@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Hi,
>> > I have developed FMD driver for Windows CE 5.0 and got it linked with
> FAL to
>> > form a block device.
>> > FMD is devleoped for NAND flash.
>> > Everything is ok except two things
>> >
>> > 1. I was perfoming partition driver test on NAND flash.The partition
> driver
>> > tested was mspart.dll..
>> > A particular test case 5103 fails everytime giving the following log.
>> >
>> > <TESTCASE ID=5103>
>> > *** vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
>> > *** TEST STARTING
>> > ***
>> > *** Test Name: R/W and bounds check disk partition data
>> > *** Test ID: 5103
>> > *** Library Path: \windows\msparttest.dll
>> > *** Command Line: -zorch
>> > *** Random Seed: 15313
>> > *** Thread Count: 1
>> > *** vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
>> > BEGIN TEST: "R/W and bounds check disk partition data", Threads=1,
>> > Seed=15313
>> > Testing disk 0
>> > Opening storage device "DSK1:"...
>> > Opening storage device "DSK1:"...
>> > Opened store 0x27c4435a
>> > Formatting store 0x27c4435a
>> > Getting store info for store 0x27c4435a
>> > Store opened and formatted successfully
>> > Requesting partition "TestPart1" of size 7895 sectors
>> > Created partition "TestPart1" of size 7895 sectors
>> > Requesting partition "TestPart2" of size 7895 sectors
>> > Created partition "TestPart2" of size 7895 sectors
>> > Requesting partition "TestPart3" of size 7894 sectors
>> > Created partition "TestPart3" of size 7894 sectors
>> > Opened partition TestPart1 on store 0x27c4435a as 0x87db123a
>> > Writing known data to partition 0x87db123a
>> > Opened partition TestPart2 on store 0x27c4435a as 0x47db123a
>> > Writing known data to partition 0x47db123a
>> > Opened partition TestPart3 on store 0x27c4435a as 0xa7db123a
>> > Writing known data to partition 0xa7db123a
>> > Opened partition TestPart1 on store 0x27c4435a as 0xa7db128a
>> > Writing known data to partition 0xa7db128a
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:CP_StartCompactor() - There aren't any DIRTY
>> > sectors left; the compactor can't be started
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:SM_GetNextFreeSector() - Unable to start
> compactor
>> > in critical situation!!!
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:SM_GetNextFreeSector() - Unable to reclaim any
> free
>> > sectors in a critical compaction stage. Media must be full.
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:WriteToMedia() - Unable to get next free
> physical
>> > sector address for writing! The media is full...
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:WriteToMedia() failed.
>> > FAIL in
>> > c:\mlqa\private\test\drivers\partitionmgr\api\msparttest\diskhelp.cpp at
>> > line 540: ReadWritePartition()
>> > FAIL in
>> > c:\mlqa\private\test\drivers\partitionmgr\api\msparttest\diskhelp.cpp at
>> > line 718: WritePartitionData()
>> > FAIL in
>> > c:\mlqa\private\test\drivers\partitionmgr\api\msparttest\testproc.cpp at
>> > line 1334: WriteAndVerifyPartition()
>> > END TEST: "R/W and bounds check disk partition data", FAILED,
>> > Time=202.945
>> > *** ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> > *** TEST COMPLETED
>> > ***
>> > *** Test Name: R/W and bounds check disk partition data
>> > *** Test ID: 5103
>> > *** Library Path: \windows\msparttest.dll
>> > *** Command Line: -zorch
>> > *** Result: Failed
>> > *** Random Seed: 15313
>> > *** Thread Count: 1
>> > *** Execution Time: 0:03:22.945
>> > *** ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> > Also, all other flash related CETK test cases are passing.
>> > 2. After a lot of operations like copy/move/delete etc on NAND flash , I
> can
>> > see the following
>> > debug output from the FLASHDRV. A lot of messages like these:
>> >
>> >
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:CP_StartCompactor() - There aren't any DIRTY
>> > sectors left; the compactor can't be started
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:SM_GetNextFreeSector() - Unable to start
> compactor
>> > in critical situation!!!
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:SM_GetNextFreeSector() - Unable to reclaim any
> free
>> > sectors in a critical compaction stage. Media must be full.
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:WriteToMedia() - Unable to get next free
> physical
>> > sector address for writing! The media is full...
>> > 0x87ecb800: FLASHDRV.DLL:WriteToMedia() failed.
>> >
>> > Then I can't perform any file operation on this partition until the next
>> > "format" operation.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Any suggestions on this would be very helpful
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- From: Hans
- Re: Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- References:
- Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- From: Hans
- Re: Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- From: Voidcoder
- Re: Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- From: Hans
- Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- Prev by Date: Re: Managed code built into OS images.
- Next by Date: Re: RESEND: Converting CEDB to EDB format
- Previous by thread: Re: Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- Next by thread: Re: Does FAL problem exist in WinCE 5.0?????
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|