From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from www.scorch.co.nz ([203.167.210.162] helo=firstline.co.nz) by bombadil.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.69 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1NmHtC-0002i7-Nw for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 02 Mar 2010 02:31:19 +0000 From: Charles Manning To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Disadvantage of using yaffs checkpointing ? Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 15:31:02 +1300 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201003021531.02989.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz> List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tuesday 02 March 2010 15:01:08 Shivdas Gujare wrote: > Hi All, > > I am very new to mtd & yaffs and working on boottime optimization and > found that yaffs checkpointing helps to mount > yaffs2 very quickly. I tried it, and was able to save almost 4sec for > 128MB partitioned nand. > > Since everything looks very good If I use yaffs checkpointing feature > but have a doubt, are there any disadvantage of using check-pointing > by default in final product? > > I understood that, check-pointing only disables boot time nand block > scanning & marking it bad if found, > and takes "system snapshot" while using "umount /dev/mtdblockN" which > it use in next boot. > So, If I decided to use "checkpointing" with "umount" while powering > off the device in final product, > are there going to be any problems I will face avoiding block scanning? > > Thanks lot for any help. > You would do better asking yaffs questions on the yaffs list. http://www.aleph1.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/yaffs -- Charles