From: Sergei Organov <osv@javad.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: o_sync in vfat driver
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:23:24 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <du20uc$ug1$1@sea.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.LNX.4.61.0602281110460.4497@chaos.analogic.com
"linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <linux-os@analogic.com> writes:
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 08:10:44AM -0500, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 col-pepper@piments.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 22:32:07 +0100, linux-os (Dick Johnson)
>>>> <linux-os@analogic.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Flash does not get zeroed to be written! It gets erased, which sets all
>>>>> the bits to '1', i.e., all bytes to 0xff.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the correction, but that does not change the discussion.
>>>>
>>>>> Further, the designers of
>>>>> flash disks are not stupid as you assume. The direct access occurs
>>>>> to static RAM (read/write stuff).
>>>>
>>>> I'm not assuming anything . Some hardware has been killed by this issue.
>>>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/5/13/144
>>>
>>> No. That hardware was not killed by that issue. The writer, or another
>>> who had encountered the same issue, eventually repartitioned and
>>> reformatted the device. The partition table had gotten corrupted by
>>> some experiments and the writer assumed that the device was broken.
>>> It wasn't.
>>>
>>> Also, if you read other elements in this thread, you would have
>>> learned about something that has become somewhat of a red herring.
>>>
>>> It takes about a second to erase a 64k physical sector. This is
>>> a required operation before it is written. Since the projected
>>> life of these new devices is about 5 to 10 million such cycles,
>>> (older NAND flash used in modems was only 100-200k) the writer
>>> would have to be running that "brand new device" for at least
>>> 5 million seconds. Let's see:
>>
>> How come I can write to my compact flash at about 2M/s if you claim it
>> takes 1s to erase a 64k sector? Somehow I think your number is much too
>> high. Or it can do multiple erases at the same time.
>>
>> Also the 5 to 10 million is a lot higher than the numbers the makers of
>> the compact flash cards I use claim.
>>
>
> Here is an instrumented erase function on a driver that rewrites
> the first sector of a BIOS ROM. Unlike the Flash DISKS, the
> BIOS ROM has no buffering in static RAM so you can gustimate
> the actual time to erase............
BIOS ROM is never NAND FLASH, it's most probably NOR FLASH, and FLASH
DISKS are most probably NAND FLASH. NOR and NAND are very different
technologies. You compare apples and oranges, -- static RAM has nothing
to do with that.
-- Sergei.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-28 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <op.s5cj47sxj68xd1@mail.piments.com>
[not found] ` <op.s5jpqvwhui3qek@mail.piments.com>
[not found] ` <op.s5kxhyzgfx0war@mail.piments.com>
[not found] ` <op.s5kx7xhfj68xd1@mail.piments.com>
[not found] ` <op.s5kya3t0j68xd1@mail.piments.com>
[not found] ` <op.s5ky2dbcj68xd1@mail.piments.com>
[not found] ` <op.s5ky71nwj68xd1@mail.piments.com>
[not found] ` <op.s5kzao2jj68xd1@mail.piments.com>
2006-02-26 22:50 ` o_sync in vfat driver col-pepper
2006-02-27 13:28 ` Lennart Sorensen
2006-02-27 13:50 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-02-27 14:06 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2006-02-27 14:27 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-02-27 14:41 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2006-02-27 21:04 ` col-pepper
2006-02-27 21:17 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-02-27 23:21 ` col-pepper
2006-02-27 21:32 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-02-27 23:21 ` col-pepper
2006-02-28 13:10 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-02-28 13:52 ` Sergei Organov
2006-02-28 15:18 ` Lennart Sorensen
2006-02-28 16:16 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-02-28 17:23 ` Sergei Organov [this message]
2006-02-28 18:09 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-02-28 17:16 ` col-pepper
2006-02-28 22:38 ` Pavel Machek
2006-02-28 23:10 ` why VM_SHM has been removed from mm.h? Kamran Karimi
2006-03-01 3:02 ` Phillip Susi
2006-03-01 7:56 ` Hugh Dickins
2006-03-01 14:58 ` Kamran Karimi
2006-03-01 16:24 ` Hugh Dickins
2006-03-01 16:55 ` Kamran Karimi
2006-03-01 17:50 ` Hugh Dickins
2006-03-01 4:28 ` o_sync in vfat driver Kyle Moffett
2006-03-02 8:23 ` col-pepper
2006-03-02 8:32 ` Pavel Machek
2006-02-28 16:11 ` Helge Hafting
2006-02-28 22:37 ` Pavel Machek
2006-02-27 14:26 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-02-27 18:53 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-02-26 22:55 col-pepper
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-02-26 23:08 col-pepper
2006-02-27 0:51 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-27 22:19 ` col-pepper
2006-02-27 23:12 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-28 18:47 ` Chris Mason
2006-02-28 19:10 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-28 19:48 ` Chris Mason
[not found] ` <87u0aiw6pi.fsf@duaron.myhome.or.jp>
2006-03-01 15:23 ` Chris Mason
[not found] ` <87mzg9wst0.fsf@duaron.myhome.or.jp>
2006-03-02 13:45 ` Chris Mason
2006-03-02 14:07 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2006-03-02 17:01 ` Chris Mason
2006-03-02 18:14 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2006-03-29 2:13 ` Mathis Ahrens
2006-03-30 17:35 ` col-pepper
2006-02-28 0:52 ` Machida, Hiroyuki
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='du20uc$ug1$1@sea.gmane.org' \
--to=osv@javad.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.