From: "George G. Davis" <gdavis@mvista.com>
To: Siddharth Choudhuri <choudhri@cs.tamu.edu>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: jffs2 vs. ext3
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 12:44:40 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EE75C78.4020408@mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0306111054540.7463-100000@unix.cs.tamu.edu>
Siddharth Choudhuri wrote:
> I am trying jffs2 and ext3 on a 3MB Intel NOR flash. I have a piece of
> code in function part_write (mtdpart.c) that outputs the size in bytes and pid
> of the process (current) sending write requests.
>
> With ext3, no matter how many bytes are written (by an application/user
> level program), the part_write function always gets a request that is
> multiple of 128K (131072 bytes). This does not happen with jffs2 though.
> Also, with ext3, the process is always mtdblockd, whereas with jffs2 the
> process sending the request is the actual user/application process.
>
> Any ideas why it happens ?
... also with ext3, you'll have a brick(TM) pretty soon too. ; )
Hint: ext3 doesn't not do flash wear levelling. You'll burn out
your flash chips pretty soon.
--
Regards,
George
>
> thanks in advance,
> -siddharth
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> Unix is user friendly - its just picky about its friends.
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Linux MTD discussion mailing list
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
>
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-11 16:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-11 16:03 jffs2 vs. ext3 Siddharth Choudhuri
2003-06-11 16:25 ` David Woodhouse
2003-06-12 16:34 ` Siddharth Choudhuri
2003-06-11 16:44 ` George G. Davis [this message]
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=3EE75C78.4020408@mvista.com \
--to=gdavis@mvista.com \
--cc=choudhri@cs.tamu.edu \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
/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