Re: [PATCH]fs/jffs2/wbuf.c: add compatibility support for OOB data block

Jörn Engel
2005-08-15T13:49:09Z

On Mon, 15 August 2005 17:42:51 +0400, Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote:
> Ferenc Havasi wrote:
> >But If I am right we use kmalloc, and its limit is 128K. Why don't we
> >use vmalloc() instead there?
> kmalloc'ed memory is faster... But I would just always use it and 1:1
> mapping...

Ouch. High-order memory allocations anyone?

My preferred approach would be to allocate a slab cache for jffs2
erase blocks. Then we either need a (much smaller) array of pointers
to the slab objects or maintain them as linked lists. But then again,
it wouldn't be the first ugly hack in jffs2. Go right ahead if you
really want to!

Jörn

--
Mundie uses a textbook tactic of manipulation: start with some
reasonable talk, and lead the audience to an unreasonable conclusion.
-- Bruce Perens