public inbox for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@cloud.net.au>
To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com>,
	Bernard Blackham <bernard@largestprime.net>
Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] ubi and u-boot
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:05:21 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080421010521.GA6317@cloud.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080420160413.GC14268@shareable.org>

On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 05:04:14PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> I was thinking this:
> 
> Hamish Moffatt wrote (Message-ID: <20080407073227.GA6317@cloud.net.au>):
> > Sorry I should've said 512MiB perhaps: 512 megabytes.
> > UBI attach time appears to be about 6 seconds.
> 
> If 6 seconds is as fast as it can be done, annoying but fair enough.
> 
> Adding _another_ 6 seconds to the boot time seems a lot to me.

Yes. I have a prototype system here booting a minimal system from NOR
flash then booting the full system from NAND via kexec. I'm suffering
my 6 seconds of UBI attach time twice each boot.

Six seconds does seem to be abnormal though - I don't have a hardware
NAND controller so it's all software ECC, GPIO for chip selects etc. The
performance is said to be much better with a hardware controller.

> To remove the double scan:
> 
> > > However, if there was a protocol for bootloader to pass the scan
> > > results to the booted kernel, that would be very nice.

That would certainly help my case. Fortunately my device is usually
always-on and therefore boot time is not critical, and we don't
suspend/resume.


Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-04-21  1:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-04-18 14:21 ubi and u-boot Bernard Blackham
2008-04-18 16:40 ` [U-Boot-Users] " Josh Boyer
2008-04-18 16:59   ` Jamie Lokier
2008-04-18 17:49     ` Bernard Blackham
2008-04-20 22:22       ` Wolfgang Denk
2008-04-21 12:05         ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-21 13:36           ` Ricard Wanderlof
2008-04-21 13:44             ` Josh Boyer
2008-04-21 13:50               ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-21 14:01                 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-22 11:44                 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2008-04-22 12:30               ` Jamie Lokier
2008-04-18 19:19     ` Josh Boyer
2008-04-20 16:04       ` Jamie Lokier
2008-04-20 16:44         ` Josh Boyer
2008-04-20 17:29           ` Jamie Lokier
2008-04-21  1:05         ` Hamish Moffatt [this message]
2008-04-19  9:25 ` Artem Bityutskiy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080421010521.GA6317@cloud.net.au \
    --to=hamish@cloud.net.au \
    --cc=bernard@largestprime.net \
    --cc=jwboyer@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=u-boot-users@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox