Re: JFFS3 & performance

Jörn Engel
2005-01-13T19:07:05Z

On Thu, 13 January 2005 18:36:53 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-01-13 at 10:30 -0800, Jared Hulbert wrote:
> > I think it says it's worth adding a no-checksum option to serve this
> > potential userbase that just doesn't need the checksums but does need
> > the speed.
>
> You may be right. That doesn't make me relish the thought of providing
> support to people who do that though :)
>
> Perhaps we could make it a mount option, and that way it's easy enough
> for people to turn it on if they have problems, before we'll talk to
> them about it.

How about making the checksum algorithm a config option? "return 0"
will also speed up the writes.

If this change is needed to get some million cell phones converted to
jffs3, I'm all for it.

Jörn

--
But this is not to say that the main benefit of Linux and other GPL
software is lower-cost. Control is the main benefit--cost is secondary.
-- Bruce Perens