From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from risingsoftware01.propagation.net ([66.221.33.65]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1HoKOw-00057Q-Np for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 16 May 2007 10:22:58 -0400 Received: from c220-237-181-46.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au ([220.237.181.46] helo=noddy.cloud.net.au) by risingsoftware01.propagation.net with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HoKOu-0006CY-Q7 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 16 May 2007 09:22:49 -0500 Received: from hamish by noddy.cloud.net.au with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1HoKOk-0001nY-Gj for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 17 May 2007 00:22:38 +1000 Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 00:22:38 +1000 From: Hamish Moffatt To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: choice of flash file system for large read-only volume Message-ID: <20070516142238.GA5725@cloud.net.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, I hope end-user questions are ok here. Don't want to distract from choosing new file systems names etc ;) On a system I'm developing I'll have a root file system on NAND flash, which will be read-only in normal use. This file system might be in the order of 128Mb or 256Mb. (We want to be able to write to it in the lab during development, but in production we'll erase/rewrite the whole volume). What would be a good choice of file system for this application? Does it come down to JFFS2 versus YAFFS, or are there other alternatives? I understand that JFFS2 mount times are proportional to the size; mount time isn't critical to me but I would like the system to boot as quickly as possible. Is YAFFS better in this regard? thanks, Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB