From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out.bhp.t-online.de ([195.145.119.39] helo=orvill.bhp.t-online.de) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 18WMKx-0002Ih-00 for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2003 19:58:03 +0000 Received: from ylva.bhp.t-online.de (ylva.ada.t-online.de [172.30.8.40]) by smtp-out.bhp.t-online.de (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 (built Feb 21 2002)) with SMTP id <0H8E001GXWVBNG@smtp-out.bhp.t-online.de> for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2003 21:28:24 +0100 (MET) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 21:27:24 +0100 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: CRAMFS on MTD/NAND Issue In-reply-to: <1042054935.10724.10.camel@timmy> To: Russ Dill , Srinivasu.Vaduguri@nokia.com Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-to: tglx@linutronix.de Message-id: <200301082127.24636.tglx@linutronix.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <1042054935.10724.10.camel@timmy> 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: On Wednesday 08 January 2003 20:42, Russ Dill wrote: > NAND *will* have bad blocks, cramfs does not handle bad blocks. There > isn't an elegant solution for this right now, but here are some options: > yaffs: desgined for NAND, but has no compression Solid, but no compression > jffs2: The NAND code is pretty new, and the journalling is probably > overkill for your application, but it will work, and should be able to > adapt to bad blocks. The code is pretty new in comparison to Makefile V1.0, but it's used in production system and can be considered "stable". It's really a realiable rootfs. > roll your own: Please, make a static compressed filesystem (like cramfs) > that incorporates extra blocks, so that when the checksum is bad while > initially writing the filesystem, or reading the file system (in the > case where ecc can save the data), it rewrites this block to a free > sector). It would seem like a simple modification to cramfs to me. Don't reinvent the wheel! :) -- Thomas ________________________________________________________________________ linutronix - competence in embedded & realtime linux http://www.linutronix.de mail: tglx@linutronix.de