Re: [PATCH] UBI: vtbl: Use ubi_eba_atomic_leb_change()

[hujianyang]

On 2014/10/31 16:09, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Hujianyang,
> 
> Am 31.10.2014 um 05:03 schrieb hujianyang:
>> Hi Artem and Richard,
>>
>> We are using atomic operation, leb_change(), for master_node
>> in ubifs-level. We use two lebs for master_node even if they
>> are changed with atomic operation.
>>
>> I think volume_table and master_node play similar roles. Do
>> you think changing VTBL record into one peb is OK? I just
>> what to know if I missed something. Could you please take
>> some time to explain that?
> 
> I'm not sure if I correctly understand your question.
> 
> If we use only one PEB for the VTBL existing UBI implementations
> would break as they assume we have two.
> 
> Thanks,
> //richard
> 
> ______________________________________________________
> Linux MTD discussion mailing list
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
> 
> 

This question is basing on your comment for this patch:

"""
we can guarantee that the first VTBL record is always
correct and we don't really need the second one anymore.
"""

I think that means one PEB is enough in your considering.
So I want to know if you are sure about this. Because
we use two leb for master_node in ubifs-level. So maybe
VTBL is like super_node, not master_node, right?

--
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/