From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759039AbYDBHVu (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 03:21:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754260AbYDBHVm (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 03:21:42 -0400 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.230]:40152 "EHLO mgw-mx03.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754236AbYDBHVm (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 03:21:42 -0400 Message-ID: <47F332FA.9000603@yandex.ru> Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 10:17:14 +0300 From: Artem Bityutskiy User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Willy Tarreau CC: "H. Peter Anvin" , Andi Kleen , Tomasz Chmielewski , LKML , penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, =?UTF-8?B?SsO2cm4gRW5nZWw=?= , ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com, jwboyer@gmail.com Subject: Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system) References: <47F1EC20.6050600@wpkg.org> <47F1F644.4060000@yandex.ru> <878wzx25s7.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <47F21B47.4000206@yandex.ru> <47F26278.5070009@zytor.com> <20080401212652.GD23796@1wt.eu> <47F30FDD.5080003@yandex.ru> <20080402062543.GA5950@1wt.eu> In-Reply-To: <20080402062543.GA5950@1wt.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Apr 2008 07:21:18.0353 (UTC) FILETIME=[24CBC810:01C89492] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Willy Tarreau wrote: > One of the problem is that unless you crash-test your flash cards, you will > never know if their wear-leveling algorithm is fine or not. And I suspect > that nowadays, due to very large consumer demand, flash cards price drop > at the cost of reliability. I think that most of those not flagged > "industrial-grade" do absolutely zero wear-leveling, because they are sold > to people using them in digital cameras, and they will never kill their > device with such a usage. Sure, I know about this problem. My point was that in this case it is wiser to use bare flash and put JFFS2 on it, instead of using this black box MMC/etc and then put JFFS2 on it. > I'm certainly not the only one with this requirement. A lot of embedded > motherboards come with IDE compactflash connectors. This is very convenient, > but if you need to keep informations between reboots, you have to write to > the device anyway. If you need to do that very often, either you pray for > the device to be very reliable, or you take all the chances on your side > by adding your own wear-leveling "just in case". OK. Fair enough. Although stuff exists, but this does not necessarily mean this a good design :-) -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)