From: xiaochuan-xu <xiaochuan-xu@cqu.edu.cn>
To: dedekind@infradead.org
Cc: linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] UBI WL-Subsys: Improvement in prot tree
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:11:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <428914065.25267@cqu.edu.cn> (raw)
Message-ID: <1228914665.3655.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1228898668.13686.223.camel@sauron>
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 10:44 +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>
> I think it does not matter much and we may use the same constant for
> short term and unknown eraseblocks. I do not see much difference
> between
> 8 or 16. Does it really matter? We just want to prevent this
> eraseblock
> from being moved for some reasonable "time". And everything depends on
> work-load of course. So I think just using the same constant for all
> PEB
My opposite experiment indicates that such unified-protection-time
method seems to be not better than the different-protection-time one in
run time. the system run time fluctuates.
One major reason, I think, is short term (youngest) PEBs got together in
the protection "queue", when they wear out the protection time and be
flushed to used RB-tree, quantities of wear-leveling worker may trigger
one time.
> types is reasonable. This will be simpler.
>
> But of course, the best way is to test things.
--
Yours sincerely
xiaochuan-xu(cqu.edu.cn)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-10 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1228823163.2753.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2008-12-09 11:46 ` [PATCH 4/4] UBI WL-Subsys: Improvement in prot tree xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-09 13:03 ` Artem Bityutskiy
[not found] ` <1228884752.3225.80.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2008-12-10 4:52 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-10 8:44 ` Artem Bityutskiy
[not found] ` <1228914665.3655.31.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2008-12-10 13:11 ` xiaochuan-xu [this message]
2008-12-10 13:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
[not found] ` <1228913251.3655.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1228931859.13686.350.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1228981865.2702.9.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229022841.13686.384.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1229332169.5306.1.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229332781.13686.447.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1229343610.2687.52.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229343746.4911.2.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1229347894.2687.56.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <1229356809.4911.57.camel@sauron>
[not found] ` <1229394788.2691.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2008-12-16 2:33 ` xiaochuan-xu
[not found] ` <1229395691.2691.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2008-12-16 2:48 ` xiaochuan-xu
2008-12-16 6:36 ` Artem Bityutskiy
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=428914065.25267@cqu.edu.cn \
--to=xiaochuan-xu@cqu.edu.cn \
--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