From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-fx0-f49.google.com ([209.85.161.49]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1PaOnl-0000SH-P2 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 08:33:02 +0000 Received: by fxm19 with SMTP id 19so14151110fxm.36 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 00:33:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: RE: UBIFS reboots issue From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Boaz Ben-David In-Reply-To: <39A4B204C321D34DA3490E3B119D5A6C68BF776758@SBS2008.wellsense.local> References: <39A4B204C321D34DA3490E3B119D5A6C68BF77673F@SBS2008.wellsense.local> <1293049245.2051.4.camel@koala> <39A4B204C321D34DA3490E3B119D5A6C68BF77674A@SBS2008.wellsense.local> , <39A4B204C321D34DA3490E3B119D5A6C68BF77573E@SBS2008.wellsense.local> <39A4B204C321D34DA3490E3B119D5A6C68BF776758@SBS2008.wellsense.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 10:32:57 +0200 Message-ID: <1294216377.2179.9.camel@koala> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 17:47 +0200, Boaz Ben-David wrote: > I'm sorry for changing the thread subject in the previous mail.. > > I guess it sums up to one main question (and I would be very greatful if > someone could answer): > > Overall, for use on MLC NAND, is UBIFS or JFFS2 more suitable? None, because no one with clue analyzed them WRT MLC-specific aspects. And no-one seriously stress-tested them on MLC, at least no-one sent any public report about this. UBIFS may appear to work, but then fail horribly when you have an unclean power cut. So again, you cannot use UBIFS as-is on MLC and sleep well. You need to spend time and test/analyze them. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)