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 15tMax-0007XC-00 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 06:16:51 +0100 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <3BCB8F35.61CC1A8B@Rikers.org> References: <3BCB8F35.61CC1A8B@Rikers.org> <3BCAED35.3000309@tid.es> To: Tim Riker Cc: Jose =?gb2312?B?Um9kcu1ndWV6?= Argente , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Read Only FS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 06:26:01 +0100 Message-ID: <18185.1003209961@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: Having a large romfs and then a relatively small jffs2 will make it boot faster, because the jffs2 scan obviously doesn't have as much to do. But you won't get the wear levelling - obviously the R/W bits are then limited to the area of flash that you partitioned for jffs2. romfs will work happily on /dev/mtdblock devices, either the full CONFIG_MTD_BLOCK device which would also allow you to update the contents (as long as it's not mounted at the time, of course) or the smaller CONFIG_MTD_BLOCK_RO module which provides the same device, just without write functionality. -- dwmw2