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 15w9SA-0002CR-00 for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:51:18 +0100 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <20011023143913.42416.qmail@web20302.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20011023143913.42416.qmail@web20302.mail.yahoo.com> To: =?iso-8859-1?q?David=20Mackay?= Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: JFFS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 23:00:32 +0100 Message-ID: <15946.1003874432@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: monitoreurope@yahoo.co.uk said: > As we use /var for FIFO data storage on this system (many 8-32K > files) we need a reliable predictable free space estimation in order > to be able to maximise the number of stored files before we delete to > add new. Therefore a better understanding of the inner workings of > JFFS would be appreciated. We make stuff up in jffs2_statfs(). You may be able to improve it if you include c->erasing_size in the calculation of 'avail', and you'll probably want to include the size of the blocks on the erase_pending_list too. -- dwmw2