From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matias Bjorling Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH RFC v1 00/01] dm-lightnvm introduction Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:56:22 -0700 Message-ID: <5330FE66.4080908@bjorling.me> References: <1395383538-18019-1-git-send-email-m@bjorling.me> <20140321090630.GA30044@debian> <532C5930.7040107@bjorling.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: device-mapper development , snitzer@redhat.com, agk@redhat.com, neilb@suse.de, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: David Lang Return-path: Received: from mail-yh0-f42.google.com ([209.85.213.42]:64047 "EHLO mail-yh0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751280AbaCYD4h (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Mar 2014 23:56:37 -0400 Received: by mail-yh0-f42.google.com with SMTP id t59so6257523yho.1 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:56:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/24/2014 08:08 PM, David Lang wrote: > On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, Matias Bjorling wrote: > >> On 03/21/2014 02:06 AM, Joe Thornber wrote: >>> Hi Matias, >>> >>> This looks really interesting and I'd love to get involved. Do you >>> have any recommendations for what hardware I should pick up? >> >> Hi Joe, >> >> The most easily available platform is OpenSSD >> (http://www.openssd-project.org). It's a little old, but still very >> functional. When there's a good firmware implementation, I think it will >> be easier for the custom SSD vendor's to jump on board with their own >> firmware. > > Is this something that would make sense to use for accessing the NAND > flash that's being used on routers nowdays? Talking with the OpenWRT > folks, they are having trouble supporting those devices because the > flash may contain defects and squashfs doesn't work in such an > environment. This appears to be the one remaining problem preventing a > lot of new routers from working. > > If this can work as a shim layer between the hardware and the filesystem > for OpenWRT, you would gain a very large userbase rather quickly. It's possible and would make sense. However, I'm not sure that its the best choice. >>From what I can see, OpenWRT routers expose their flash through mtd. Couldn't UBIFS be a better choice for this, instead of squashfs? > > David Lang