From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yury Umanets Subject: Re: Reiser4 status: benchmarked vs. V3 (and ext3) Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 18:15:05 +0400 Message-ID: <1059315305.25361.9.camel@haron.namesys.com> References: <3F1EF7DB.2010805@namesys.com> <1059062380.29238.260.camel@sonja> <16160.4704.102110.352311@laputa.namesys.com> <1059093594.29239.314.camel@sonja> <16161.10863.793737.229170@laputa.namesys.com> <1059142851.6962.18.camel@sonja> <1059143985.19594.3.camel@haron.namesys.com> <1059181687.10059.5.camel@sonja> <1059203990.21910.13.camel@haron.namesys.com> <1059228808.10692.7.camel@sonja> <3F23D38B.3020309@namesys.com> <1059315015.10692.207.camel@sonja> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <1059315015.10692.207.camel@sonja> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Daniel Egger Cc: Hans Reiser , Nikita Danilov , Linux Kernel Mailinglist , reiserfs mailing list On Sun, 2003-07-27 at 18:10, Daniel Egger wrote: > Am Son, 2003-07-27 um 15.28 schrieb Hans Reiser: > > > it is suitable for any flash device that has wear leveling built into > > the hardware (e.g. all compact flash cards) > > Are you sure CF cards have wear leveling? I'm pretty confident that they > have defect sector management but no wear leveling. There's a huge > difference between those two. > > > or for which a wear leveling block device driver is used (I don't know > > if one exists for Linux). > > This is normally done by the filesystem (e.g. JFFS2). Normally device driver should be concerned about making wear out smaller. It is up to it IMHO. -- We're flying high, we're watching the world passes by...