RE: MTD/mtdblock.c uclinux 2.0.38?

Mike Voytovich
2001-07-18T06:45:11Z

>Wouldn't it be easier to forward-port uCLinux to 2.4? Didn't someone
>already do that, in fact?

Yes, there is a uClinux 2.4.x port. However, there are some issues with
that port; for example, I'm not sure if MMU-less ARM support is complete.
It definitely is complete for 2.0.x. And, there's the size issue...

>Just provide internally to the JFFS2 code sufficient dcache stuff
>for it to work. Pretend dentries are JFFS2-internal data structures.

Cool, that seems like good advice - perhaps we'll try that. Thanks for the
feedback.

Regards,
-mike

-----Original Message-----
From: David Woodhouse
To: Mike Voytovich
Cc: Steve Kranz; linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Sent: 7/17/01 11:16 PM
Subject: Re: MTD/mtdblock.c uclinux 2.0.38?

mvoytovich@coactive.com said:
> One big issue is that JFFS2 seems to rely on the dirent cache, which
> isn't present in the 2.0.x kernel. So, I suppose that would have to
> be backported from 2.2.x (if that's even a reasonable task).

Wouldn't it be easier to forward-port uCLinux to 2.4? Didn't someone
already do that, in fact?

> I don't know what other kernel dependencies (besides dirent cache)
> there are for JFFS2... I wonder if anyone has been successful in
> getting JFFS2 working with 2.0.x?? Any feedback would be
> appreciated...

JFFS1 will be easier. JFFS2 is possible but may be a lot of work. The
dcache
thing should be the biggest problem - and that's possible to work
around. I
wouldn't backport the whole of the dcache thing to 2.0 - that would
involve
completely rewriting the VFS. Just provide internally to the JFFS2 code
sufficient dcache stuff for it to work. Pretend dentries are
JFFS2-internal
data structures.

--
dwmw2