Re: FAT vs jFFS2 for NAND.

[Charles Manning <manningc2@actrix.gen.nz>]

On Tuesday 20 June 2006 08:23, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 11:31 -0700, Han Chang wrote:
> > Thanks! The reason for using FAT on the NAND is when the device has the
> > NAND is connected to a PC via USB, it can appear to be storage device
> > read by the PC user directly.
>
> Can't you use the 'PTP' USB protocol, which is designed for sharing
> pictures? It can also share an arbitrary file system, I believe.

I looked at PTP a while back. This is very picture centric and is no use for 
general file transfer.

There's also a newer (and as-yet unratified) protocol that allows transfers of 
other files. These allow transfer of other file types, but still don't 
support a full fs.

A USB-ftp would be a GoodThing.

>
> Failing that, SmartMedia makes a certain amount of sense. Use the code
> from the CVS tree as a basis, or just do it yourself (using the
> mtd_blkdevs helper stuff which we already use for nftl etc.)

Unfortiunately USB Mass Storage (with a Windows host) pretty much forces the 
use of FAT on top of a block driver.  The SmartMedia block driver model is 
suffieciently robust (FAT corruptions are far more likely to cause failures).

-- CHarles