From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Frans Meulenbroeks" Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] AXFS: Advanced XIP filesystem Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:32:08 +0200 Message-ID: References: <48AD00C4.6060302@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=8xpiuwbab4A1k8OJibpemPRWBqYQjsumUTSbhKzaIRI=; b=CyyyKsK2IQohZEgDjiIhLQAhZJdopGUZHtCufbjKBh38varTFgyXjZh5NfLBrAkp3p muA0bTwVtf4evInlm4I7So7eoePbOQeHjvRAM1ynM4P4OMG+5tKfAxnQ/L+xl8W1VQzY x54CUUNwpHgtDv6eXvy57dZrQ1rEElBgd4n3U= In-Reply-To: <48AD00C4.6060302@gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: jaredeh@gmail.com Cc: Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn_Engel?= , tim.bird@am.sony.com, cotte@de.ibm.com, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au Jared, nice work! I've also read your paper from the linux symposium (http://ols.fedoraproject.org/OLS/Reprints-2008/hulbert-reprint.pdf) A few questions: - how does this benchmark compared to cramfs and squashfs in a NAND-only system (or is it just not a good plan to use this with NAND-only (of course I won't get XIP with NAND, I understand that) - would axfs be suitable as a filesystem on a ram disk? Background for the last question is that if you do not have the memory to retain all pages uncompressed (as you would with ramfs), this could be a nice intermediate format. Furthermore compared to ramfs, a filesystem on a ramdisk does not need the initialisation during startup (decompressing the cpio file, creating the files, copying the data), so when it comes to boot times a filesystem on a ramdisk (e.g. axfs) could be a better choice. Appreciate your feedback. Frans.