From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>,
Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/1] ubi: Add ubiblock driver
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:00:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121121110022.35db364f@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALF0-+WuaUn5b=2XrzqW7pvM=N1MfQf=sFwLFOrokTkHbOXh3w@mail.gmail.com>
Dear Ezequiel Garcia,
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:39:38 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> * Read/write support
>
> Yes, this implementation supports read/write access.
While I think the original ubiblk that was read-only made sense to
allow the usage of read-only filesystems like squashfs, I am not sure a
read/write ubiblock is useful.
Using a standard block read/write filesystem on top of ubiblock is going
to cause damage to your flash. Even though UBI does wear-leveling, your
standard block read/write filesystem will think it has 512 bytes block
below him, and will do a crazy number of writes to small blocks. Even
though you have a one LEB cache, it is going to be defeated quite
strongly by the small random I/O of the read/write filesystem.
I am not sure letting people use read/write block filesystems on top of
flashes, even through UBI, is a good idea.
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com>,
Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/1] ubi: Add ubiblock driver
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:00:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121121110022.35db364f@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALF0-+WuaUn5b=2XrzqW7pvM=N1MfQf=sFwLFOrokTkHbOXh3w@mail.gmail.com>
Dear Ezequiel Garcia,
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:39:38 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> * Read/write support
>
> Yes, this implementation supports read/write access.
While I think the original ubiblk that was read-only made sense to
allow the usage of read-only filesystems like squashfs, I am not sure a
read/write ubiblock is useful.
Using a standard block read/write filesystem on top of ubiblock is going
to cause damage to your flash. Even though UBI does wear-leveling, your
standard block read/write filesystem will think it has 512 bytes block
below him, and will do a crazy number of writes to small blocks. Even
though you have a one LEB cache, it is going to be defeated quite
strongly by the small random I/O of the read/write filesystem.
I am not sure letting people use read/write block filesystems on top of
flashes, even through UBI, is a good idea.
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-21 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-20 22:39 [RFC/PATCH 0/1] ubi: Add ubiblock driver Ezequiel Garcia
2012-11-21 5:28 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2012-11-21 9:56 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2012-11-21 10:00 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2012-11-21 10:05 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2012-11-24 21:02 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2012-11-25 7:36 ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-11-30 11:24 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-12-02 17:39 ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-12-03 0:58 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2012-12-03 19:33 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2012-12-03 21:03 ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-11-30 11:18 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-30 11:15 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-21 10:00 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2012-11-21 10:00 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2012-11-21 10:42 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2012-11-21 10:42 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2012-11-30 11:25 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-30 11:25 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-30 11:08 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-30 11:08 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-11-30 20:43 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2012-11-30 20:43 ` Ezequiel Garcia
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121121110022.35db364f@skate \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=elezegarcia@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com \
--cc=tim.bird@am.sony.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.