From: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>,
"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
"Enzinger,
Robert (EXT-Other - DE/Munich)" <robert.enzinger.ext@nsn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add quick erase format option
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:37:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1281361027.19869.40.camel@wall-e.seibold.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1281353344.2332.8.camel@brekeke>
Am Montag, den 09.08.2010, 14:29 +0300 schrieb Artem Bityutskiy:
> On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 10:52 +0200, Stefani Seibold wrote:
> > Am Montag, den 09.08.2010, 09:37 +0100 schrieb David Woodhouse:
> > > On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 09:25 +0100, stefani@seibold.net wrote:
> > > > From: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
> > > >
> > > > This patch add a quick format option which skips erasing of already erased
> > > > flash blocks. This is useful for first time production environments where
> > > > the flash arrived erased.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
> > >
> > > This scares me, given the lengths we had to go to in JFFS2 to cope with
> > > blocks which *look* like they're erased, but which actually start losing
> > > data as soon as you start writing to them because the erase didn't
> > > complete.
> > >
> >
> > I know the drawback. This is why it is only an option which must be
> > enabled. And in most use cases there is a subsequent ubimkvol, which
> > will fail if the flash is not correct initialized.
> >
> > Flash are normally delivered erased. So this save in our production
> > environment (Nokia Siemens Networks) about 5 minutes per device (256 MB
> > NOR CFI Flash).
> >
> > The old JFFS2 was very fast to install the first time on a flash, it was
> > only a simple mount of the MTD partition.
>
> Not sure what you do, but both UBI and UBIFS auto-format flash if it is
> empty, and attaching empty flash should be very fast.
>
I was never able to mount UBIFS without a previous ubimkvol, despite the
flash is already erased.
> But yes, the first volume creation ioctl will block until everything is
> erased, although this is just an implementation issue and in theory,
> fixable.
>
Here are my timing results for mounting an empty flash as UBIFS:
ubiattach /dev/ubi_ctrl -m 5 -d 1 --> 2.023 sec
ubimkvol /dev/ubi1 -m -N flash --> 294.574 sec
mount -t ubifs -o sync ubi1:flash /mnt --> 0.221 sec
or
ubiformat /dev/mtd5 --> 299.111 sec
ubiattach /dev/ubi_ctrl -m 5 -d 1 --> 0.129 sec
ubimkvol /dev/ubi1 -m -N flash --> 1.784 sec
mount -t ubifs -o sync ubi1:flash /mnt --> 0.220 sec
So there is no real benefit between an empty flash and a formated flash.
And this are the timing results for formating and mounting an empty
flash with my patched ubiformat tool:
ubiformat /dev/mtd5 -E --> 5.475 sec
ubiattach /dev/ubi_ctrl -m 5 -d 1 --> 0.130 sec
ubimkvol /dev/ubi1 -m -N flash --> 1.699 sec
mount -t ubifs -o sync ubi1:flash /mnt --> 0.220 sec
As you can see this is 296,818 vs. 7,522 or 40 times faster!
But maybe i do something wrong. Could you explain this?
> > Which the quick format option i have now only a slightly first time
> > installation overhead compared to JFFS2. Without this option the
> > overhead is more than 5 minutes.
>
> Are you flashing an UBI image in production? Then what you can do if you
> want to be faster is to flash only the blocks which contain image date,
> and leave the rest intact, UBI will erase them and write EC header to
> them when you first boot the device.
>
No, we only initialize the flash, mount the UBIFS it and copy files.
> So I think it is better to add an --pristine-flash option, or something
> like this. In this case ubiformat won't erase anything, and will assume
> everything is 0xFFed without reading. This should be faster and I think
> is better to do.
>
My patch assumes nothing, it check if the EC header is 0xff and i think
this is safer than your suggestion. My patch skips the erase if all
bytes in the header are 0xff skip, otherwise erase it.
- Stefani
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-09 13:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-09 8:25 [PATCH] Add quick erase format option stefani
2010-08-09 8:37 ` David Woodhouse
2010-08-09 8:52 ` Stefani Seibold
2010-08-09 11:29 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-09 13:37 ` Stefani Seibold [this message]
2010-08-09 13:54 ` Stefani Seibold
2010-08-29 11:30 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-29 12:20 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-08-31 6:42 ` Stefani Seibold
2010-09-01 0:47 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-09-02 6:53 ` Stefani Seibold
2010-09-02 10:58 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-09-02 11:42 ` Stefani Seibold
2018-06-20 5:38 ` Richard Weinberger
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=1281361027.19869.40.camel@wall-e.seibold.net \
--to=stefani@seibold.net \
--cc=Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robert.enzinger.ext@nsn.com \
/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