From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.170] helo=mgw-ext11.nokia.com) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1GwxYO-0006xk-SC for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2006 04:16:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Reduce boot time with jffs2 and CM-X255 From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Ricard Wanderlof In-Reply-To: References: <45881281.8060001@sacet.com> <4588E35F.8000806@fatti.com> <4588F67A.6080602@sacet.com> <1166604838.3939.12.camel@sauron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 11:15:39 +0200 Message-Id: <1166606139.3939.15.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Linux mtd Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 10:06 +0100, Ricard Wanderlof wrote: > At least in the 2.6.18 kernels, summary support is marked as EXPERIMENTAL= .=20 > Is it stable enough to be used for production? (I don't know, just=20 > curious). Well, we heavily utilize it, and I know some serious projects like OLPC where summary is utilized. So I would say it is stable enough. --=20 Best regards, Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E=D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9 =D0=90= =D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC)