Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system)

From: Artem Bityutskiy
Date: Wed Apr 02 2008 - 03:21:53 EST


Willy Tarreau wrote:
One of the problem is that unless you crash-test your flash cards, you will
never know if their wear-leveling algorithm is fine or not. And I suspect
that nowadays, due to very large consumer demand, flash cards price drop
at the cost of reliability. I think that most of those not flagged
"industrial-grade" do absolutely zero wear-leveling, because they are sold
to people using them in digital cameras, and they will never kill their
device with such a usage.

Sure, I know about this problem. My point was that in this case it is wiser
to use bare flash and put JFFS2 on it, instead of using this black box
MMC/etc and then put JFFS2 on it.

I'm certainly not the only one with this requirement. A lot of embedded
motherboards come with IDE compactflash connectors. This is very convenient,
but if you need to keep informations between reboots, you have to write to
the device anyway. If you need to do that very often, either you pray for
the device to be very reliable, or you take all the chances on your side
by adding your own wear-leveling "just in case".

OK. Fair enough. Although stuff exists, but this does not necessarily mean
this a good design :-)

--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (ÐÑÑÑÐ ÐÐÑÑÑÐÐÐ)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/