From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.broadpark.no ([217.13.4.2]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Bkdbj-0008Se-Rj for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2004 02:51:12 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=D8yvind?= Harboe To: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <1089787265.8822.31.camel@imladris.demon.co.uk> References: <1089728296.6288.19.camel@famine> <1089760454.8822.23.camel@imladris.demon.co.uk> <1089786408.7607.4.camel@famine> <1089787265.8822.31.camel@imladris.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Message-Id: <1089787869.7607.9.camel@famine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 08:51:09 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Prune obsolete raw_node_ref's from RAM List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 08:41, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 08:26 +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > > Would all the performance problems go away if the lists were doubly > > linked? > > Well yes, but since the object of the exercise was to save memory, > doubling the size of the objects in question doesn't really strike me as > being the right way to approach the problem :) The memory problem I ran into wasn't the size of the un-obsolete nodes, but that they grew with the number of obsolete nodes. I hate #if's in code as much as the next guy, but JFFS2 spans deeply embedded systems to full-fledged PCs and it is only to be expected that the different profiles have different needs. -- Øyvind Harboe http://www.zylin.com