From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237] helo=passion.cambridge.redhat.com) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 178MB1-0003bI-00 for ; Thu, 16 May 2002 15:24:19 +0100 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <20020516141410.72690.qmail@web21509.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020516141410.72690.qmail@web21509.mail.yahoo.com> To: Studying MTD Cc: linux-mtd Subject: Re: FAT for NAND Flash Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 15:24:17 +0100 Message-ID: <15117.1021559057@redhat.com> Sender: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: studying_mtd@yahoo.com said: > 1. Is it possible to use FAT filesystem with NAND Flash. Not directly. You need to use a translation layer on the NAND flash to make it emulate a normal hard drive, on which you can put any normal file system. > 2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using FAT with NAND > Flash. You end up with a file system on top of another pseudo-filesystem which is doing the hard drive emulation for you. Ideally, both of them need to do their own journalling to ensure consistency at each level -- that's why it's better just to have a file system that's designed to run on flash. We aren't running DOS any more. We don't need to pretend to be a hard drive just so that we can provide an INT 13h handler and have it 'just work'. > 3. What is the difference between SmartMedia DOS-FAT and ordinary Fat > filesystem. AFAIK nothing. SmartMedia has a translation layer just like FTL and NFTL, and you put a normal FAT file system on top of that. -- dwmw2