From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from majordomo by infradead.org with local (Exim 3.20 #2) id 14WDV5-0003JD-00 for mtd-list@infradead.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:22:51 +0000 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237] helo=passion.cambridge.redhat.com) by infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #2) id 14WDV4-0003J7-00 for mtd@infradead.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:22:50 +0000 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <3A957005.3400694E@danielind.com> References: <3A957005.3400694E@danielind.com> <30724FF712DFD2119E6200104B2448920119744A@mail1> <3A956884.2050504@brocade.com> To: Vipin Malik Cc: Amit D Chaudhary , Vipin Malik , "'mtd@infradead.org'" Subject: Re: Unable to mount compressed root f/s because init_mtd() does not r egister block device! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:22:47 +0000 Message-ID: <20729.982916567@redhat.com> Sender: owner-mtd@infradead.org List-ID: vmalik@danielind.com said: > Also, as far as reading goes, there is no real difference between the > mtd0 device and the block device (i.e. reading from mtd0 does not get > you anything extra). Except that the block device is quite a lot of unnecessary overhead (and a kernel thread, etc.). Reading directly from the MTD device rather than through either the blockdevice or chardevice would be nicer. Actually, for 2.4 I'd like to be able to extract a tarball from an MTD device directly into ramfs rather than ramdisk. CONFIG_BLK_DEV=n -- dwmw2 To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe mtd" to majordomo@infradead.org