Re: CLEANMARKER question

David Woodhouse
2002-01-04T10:30:58Z

joakim.tjernlund@lumentis.se said:
> OK, I suspected that much. So after a CLEANMARKER there can be a
> NODETYPE_INODE or a NODETYPE_DIRENT?

Or indeed any other type of node, when new ones get invented - yes.

> Why do you do 2 scan_empty() calls in scan_eraseblock() ?

Consider it loop unrolling.

> Well, sofar I have only identified one improvement. One could add an
> isempty() function in the mtd layer. That would improve scaning for
> empy flash so that you dont have to mtd->read() into a buffer and then
> check the buffer for 0xffffffff. How does that sound?

Sounds ugly, but could be effective. Want to benchmark it to see if it's
really worth it?

If there's a way to safely avoid having to check all the node CRCs on
mount, that would also help.

The most useful thing to do, though, would probably be to implement
checkpointing.

--
dwmw2