From: xiaochuan-xu <xiaochuan-xu@cqu.edu.cn>
To: dedekind@infradead.org
Cc: linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] UBI WL-Subsys: Improvement in prot tree
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:11:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <428914065.25267@cqu.edu.cn> (raw)
Message-ID: <1228914665.3655.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1228898668.13686.223.camel@sauron>
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 10:44 +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>
> I think it does not matter much and we may use the same constant for
> short term and unknown eraseblocks. I do not see much difference
> between
> 8 or 16. Does it really matter? We just want to prevent this
> eraseblock
> from being moved for some reasonable "time". And everything depends on
> work-load of course. So I think just using the same constant for all
> PEB
My opposite experiment indicates that such unified-protection-time
method seems to be not better than the different-protection-time one in
run time. the system run time fluctuates.
One major reason, I think, is short term (youngest) PEBs got together in
the protection "queue", when they wear out the protection time and be
flushed to used RB-tree, quantities of wear-leveling worker may trigger
one time.
> types is reasonable. This will be simpler.
>
> But of course, the best way is to test things.
--
Yours sincerely
xiaochuan-xu(cqu.edu.cn)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-10 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-09 11:46 [PATCH 4/4] UBI WL-Subsys: Improvement in prot tree xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-09 11:46 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-09 13:03 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-12-10 4:52 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-10 4:52 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-10 8:44 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-12-10 13:11 ` xiaochuan-xu [this message]
2008-12-10 13:11 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-10 13:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
[not found] ` <1228913251.3655.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1228931859.13686.350.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1228981865.2702.9.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229022841.13686.384.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1229332169.5306.1.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229332781.13686.447.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1229343610.2687.52.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229343746.4911.2.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1229347894.2687.56.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229356809.4911.57.camel@sauron>
2008-12-16 2:33 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-16 2:33 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-16 2:48 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-16 2:48 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-16 6:36 ` Artem Bityutskiy
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=428914065.25267@cqu.edu.cn \
--to=xiaochuan-xu@cqu.edu.cn \
--cc=dedekind@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
/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.