From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fed1mtao04.cox.net ([68.6.19.241]) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 17u7gC-0002zi-00 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:37:56 +0100 Subject: RE: Interest in DOC and YAFFS? --> YAFFS bootloading From: Russ Dill To: Srinivasan.Ramasubramaniam@nokia.com Cc: elf@buici.com, kenneth.johansson@etx.ericsson.se, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 25 Sep 2002 01:38:31 -0700 Message-Id: <1032943112.23565.15.camel@russ> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 00:09, Srinivasan.Ramasubramaniam@nokia.com wrote: > Hi all ! > > I request your help to clarify a doubt with regard to initrd-filesystem and cramfs. > > If we use cramfs in place initrd-filesystem, will the entire filesystem will be uncompressed and loaded onto the RAM ? > > But in initrd-filesystem, the entire filesystem is uncompressed and loaded. the compressed cramfs image will be loaded into ram, and then, from there, as pages are needed, they will be decompressed again and put into ram (but again, if memory is in a pinch, these pages can be dropped). I don't know if an ext2 initrd will do XIP (execute in place), but I somehow doubt that anyone has worked on that, meaning that the pages would need to be copied again, in which case, a cramfs would use less ram.