From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from co203.xi-lite.net ([149.6.83.203] helo=toronto.xi-lite.net) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1JFniC-00079w-6h for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:40:39 +0000 Message-ID: <479073D1.5010406@parrot.com> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:39:29 +0100 From: Matthieu CASTET MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Josh Boyer Subject: Re: Jffs2 and big file = very slow jffs2_garbage_collect_pass References: <478F7E6D.8010300@parrot.com> <20080117162601.GA6677@lazybastard.org> <20080117114353.0bc71dac@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20080117114353.0bc71dac@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, =?UTF-8?B?SsO2cm4gRW5nZWw=?= , David Woodhouse List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:26:01 +0100 > Jörn Engel wrote: > >>> If we do a ls without waiting that jffs2_garbage_collect_pass finish, ls >>> takes 12 minutes to complete. >> Impressive! JFFS2 may be slow, but it shouldn't be _that_ slow. Not > > How do you know? A 200MiB file will likely have around 50,000 nodes. Yes the file got 41324 nodes. > If the summary stuff is incorrect, and since we have no idea what kind > of platform is being used here, it may well be within reason. > The summary stuff is correct (I check it with a parser on a dump of the image). Also if the summary wasn't correct, only the mount time will grow ? In my case the mount is ok : less than 5-10s. The platform used is an arm926 @247 Mhz Matthieu