public inbox for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Schlaegl Manfred jun." <manfred.schlaegl@gmx.at>
To: dedekind@infradead.org
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Powerfail-tests and jffs2-sync-mount
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:45:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1204875955.3476.13.camel@lisa.alm.archives.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1204870246.23706.53.camel@sauron>

Hi!

Am Freitag, den 07.03.2008, 08:10 +0200 schrieb Artem Bityutskiy:
> On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 17:41 +0100, Schlägl Manfred jun. wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > I did some powerfail-testing of jffs2. 
> > 
> > Short overview (Contact me for details):
> > Arch: ARM926EJ-S with 40MB rw jffs2 part on Samsung NAND-Flash
> > Kernel: linux-2.6.12 (a little bit out of date, i know ;-))
> > Test: 
> >  * Target-Loop
> >    * filesystem-consistency:
> >      * create dir
> >      * copy data(> eraseblock-size) to new file
> >      * delete a file
> >    * file-consistency:
> >      * logfile on jffs-part (simply appending text with echo)
> >  * External random-time reset:
> >    * external uC
> >    * generates reset every 120+rand(0..30) seconds
> >  * Run until no more space on filesystem
> > Results:
> >  * test with sync-mounted jffs2 (mount -o sync):
> >    * duration 4:40 hours
> >    * 131 generated resets
> >    * consistent FS
> >    * consistent logfile
> >  * test with async mounted jffs2:
> >    * duration 4:10 hours
> >    * 118 generated resets
> >    * consistent FS
> >    * corrupted logfile (bad-chars, etc.)
> > 
> > Now my question: Are there any non-obvious disadvantages, mounting jffs2
> > synchronal, except lower speed and a little(depends on usage) decreased
> > flash-life-time (wear-out), or is this anyway the default approach?
> 
> My understanding of the things is that this should not really matter. I
> thought if you have some corruption in asynchronous mode, you should
> have them in synchronous too, may its worth trying more synchronous mode
> testing?
> 
I thought it's a matter of file-buffers between the file-operations and
jffs2, but these buffer should be flushed on close of the file, so there
should be no problem with echo.
I think i've to take a look on vfs, perhaps there is some buffering, or
(even worst) some reodering of actions.

Currently i've to do some other tests (bootloader bad-block-handling).
After that I will work on some methodes to keep different
files-types(config-files, log-files, ...) conistent in case of
powerfail. So I will do some further tests on saturday or thursday.

Best regards,
        Manfred Schlaegl

  reply	other threads:[~2008-03-07  7:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-06 16:41 Powerfail-tests and jffs2-sync-mount Schlägl Manfred jun.
2008-03-07  6:10 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-03-07  7:45   ` Schlaegl Manfred jun. [this message]
2008-03-07  8:09     ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-03-25  6:50       ` Schlaegl Manfred jun.

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1204875955.3476.13.camel@lisa.alm.archives.at \
    --to=manfred.schlaegl@gmx.at \
    --cc=dedekind@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox