From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from waste.org ([209.173.204.2]) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.14 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 19MHad-00051k-7z for ; Sun, 01 Jun 2003 02:24:51 +0100 Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 20:25:16 -0500 From: Matt Mackall To: Con Kolivas Message-ID: <20030601012516.GJ23715@waste.org> References: <20030530174319.GA16687@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <20030530.235505.23020750.davem@redhat.com> <20030531075615.GA25089@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <200305311822.21823.kernel@kolivas.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200305311822.21823.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: "David S. Miller" cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org cc: J?rn Engel cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org cc: jmorris@intercode.com.au Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] 1/2 central workspace for zlib List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 06:22:21PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > > The only way I could think of was perhaps using a load on another disk > (io_other which is in contest) that is using jffs2 when the contest baseline > is running on a normal filesystem - this has shown very little differences > between filesystems normally. Otherwise if everything in contest is run on > jffs2 it would affect every layer and hard to be sure you had a control to > compare with. Timing on jffs2 is notoriously unrepeatable anyway - it's fully log structured rather than journalled so it behaves a little differently. -- Matt Mackall : http://www.selenic.com : of or relating to the moon