From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from top.free-electrons.com ([176.31.233.9] helo=mail.free-electrons.com) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WCmbN-0003gA-6f for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:52:29 +0000 Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 05:50:01 -0300 From: Ezequiel Garcia To: Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ubi: Introduce block devices for UBI volumes Message-ID: <20140210085000.GC10872@localhost> References: <1391027881-8354-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <1391027881-8354-2-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <20140210012913.GA9505@localhost> <52F8856A.6050208@nod.at> <20140210081159.GA10872@localhost> <1392020652.32363.6.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1392020652.32363.6.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Mike Frysinger , Richard Weinberger , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , Michael Opdenacker , Piergiorgio Beruto , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , Willy Tarreau List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:24:12AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 05:12 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 08:53:14AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > > Am 10.02.2014 02:29, schrieb Ezequiel Garcia: > > > >>> + > > > >>> + mutex_lock(&dev->vol_mutex); > > > >>> + res = do_ubiblock_request(dev, req); > > > >>> + mutex_unlock(&dev->vol_mutex); > > > >> > > > >> This means that you can never do parallel IO? > > > >> > > > > > > > > Indeed. Feel free to prepare a follow-up patch improving it, > > > > once this is merged. > > > > > > Sorry, this is a very lame argument. > > > > > > You need to describe why your application design has this flaw. > > > > Not at all. It's perfectly fine to merge a feature with a simple > > implementation and improve it progressively. In fact, I've explicitly > > chosen the simplest implementation whenever possible. We can always > > get back here and improve the performance. > > The NAND part of the MTD layer serializes all the I/O, so probably it is > OK. May be needs to be documented, though. May be a comment in the code > would be nice to have too. > Yes, of course. [..] > Would you be able to write a small article for the MTD web site about > the driver, may be some I/O figures there too, the limitations too? And > send a patch against mtd-www.git > Sure! -- Ezequiel GarcĂ­a, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com