Re: JFFS2 mount time

Jörn Engel
2004-12-19T02:44:53Z

On Sat, 18 December 2004 20:48:50 +0000, Gareth Bult (Encryptec) wrote:
>
> Like I said, hacked to work [for me] and not to look pretty.
>
> To be honest what's there will do me for now .. although I'd like to
> clean it up a little when I get time.
>
> fyi; don't confuse the old and new code.

Sure. I had a look at tkdiff and there was ~50% unchanged code.
"This code ain't pretty." didn't mean "You sh*thead are stupid and
cannot create decent code." It was more like "It still ain't pretty,
although you already improved it."

> > o Coding style (Lindent?)
>
> Whatever was there already.
>
> > o Function length
>
> My functions are shorter than the ones that were there, lots can be
> cleaned up here.
>
> > o #ifdef MODULE
>
> .. ? I only use it as a module, not of this code was touched.
>
> > o parameters have an insane interface
>
> .. again , parameters and interfaces are all from the original with the
> exception of a couple of new routines which mirror existing parameter
> lists.
>
> > o ro-devices. the same can be achieved with chmod.
>
> Again, not touched this.

Yep. Those five point were the obvious stuff I could find in five
minutes. Fixing them takes a lot more than five minutes and changing
the parameter interface basically means copying the thing and fixing
the new one.

I did the same with slram/phram. The slram interface was different
for module/non-module built and insane once you had more than a single
device. Mtdblock looks quite similar and seems to need the same cure.
So whatever you can improve, please do.

Jörn

--
It's just what we asked for, but not what we want!
-- anonymous