From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261358AbVFAJhM (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 05:37:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261355AbVFAJen (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 05:34:43 -0400 Received: from nproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.182.196]:6525 "EHLO nproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261363AbVFAJdd convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 05:33:33 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UzM9IrE1KEChy68nDA+uTqgW87SEXrgkqoO3wRaNV9iM+WRkndkahZ6qyuJpTV1sWXstFN3B5CEfqTM/CbzMN6pn1QtfOJ+Hw1pqBqAvyT+76lWX2F+zjYAyLqN8t1/PViG6Stto95CSTm+i1LbvSXqygZi062InksGleBIz4Z0= Message-ID: <2cd57c90050601023358417bbd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 17:33:29 +0800 From: Coywolf Qi Hunt Reply-To: coywolf@lovecn.org To: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/5] add execute in place support Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn_Engel?= , Carsten Otte , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, akpm@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <1115890981.16187.553.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <428216DF.8070205@de.ibm.com> <1115828389.16187.544.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> <42823450.8030007@freenet.de> <20050512085741.GA16361@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <1115890981.16187.553.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/12/05, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 10:57 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > > In principle, both the block device abstraction and the mtd > > abstraction fit your bill. But jffs2 doesn't, so no in-kernel fs > > could make use of a xip-aware mtd abstraction. > > > > Patching jffs2 for xip looks like a major effort, at best, and utterly > > insane at worst. I'd prefer not to go down that path. > > You and me both. The time has definitely come to recognise that JFFS2 > needs replacing ;) I'd say yaffs seems to be a good one. -- Coywolf Qi Hunt http://ahbl.org/~coywolf/