From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 147.175.241.83.in-addr.dgcsystems.net ([83.241.175.147] helo=tmnt04.transmode.se) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1HfBPA-0006LD-Bw for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 21 Apr 2007 04:57:18 -0400 From: "Joakim Tjernlund" To: "'David Woodhouse'" Subject: RE: [PATCH] Obsolete nodes that are unlinked when possible Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:56:49 +0200 Message-ID: <00fe01c783f2$ff8810a0$020120ac@Jocke> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <1177103631.30621.35.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > -----Original Message----- > From: David Woodhouse [mailto:dwmw2@infradead.org] > Sent: den 20 april 2007 23:14 > To: Joakim Tjernlund > Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Obsolete nodes that are unlinked when possible > > On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 21:34 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > Ping. > > Sorry for taking so long to look at this. Did you test this without > SUMMARY support? hmm, not sure. I think so, but not much. The idea was that to get some testing, you need to enable its use in MTD git. > > I agree that we ought to make the summary code _not_ imply > !jffs2_can_mark_obsolete(). There's a few things I want to > change about > the summary code -- the nodes are currently about twice as > large as they > need to be, too. I'll look at that soon. Rigth, but more important is that the GC procedure needs to GC more aggressively, otherwise you will end up with a very fragmented FS in some cases. ATM I am doing board bringup and won't be able to spend any time on JFFS2. Jocke