From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21] helo=azsmga101-1.ch.intel.com) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1FM3V8-0000tr-5A for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:35:56 -0500 Message-ID: <442152A5.9020300@intel.com> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:35:33 +0300 From: Alexander Belyakov MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dedekind@infradead.org References: <1142953764.13740.0.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> <442041BE.9070407@intel.com> <1142967444.13740.9.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> <44211B5F.2030200@intel.com> <44211E6E.7070406@yandex.ru> <4421263A.7010900@intel.com> <1143024670.13740.40.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> In-Reply-To: <1143024670.13740.40.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Korolev, Alexey" , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, "Kutergin, Timofey" Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Linux MTD striping middle layer List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Artem B. Bityutskiy wrote: > Ok, this only confirms that you should compose a small and nice > documentation file. > What exactly do you wish to see in that small documentation file? BTW I made such a file before sending patch to infradead mailing list - you can see it in the original message. After discussion here I can extend it with all questions and answers from this thread if needed. > A question arises, does this make sense to stripe flashes with different > erasesize at all? Flashes should be of particular size in order not to > waste space. Any real need to make the striping layer more complex? > Making striped device from flashes with different erasesize does not make striping layer significantly more complex. Just some additional math to calculate least common multiple at the creation stage. Thanks, Alexander Belyakov