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

[Richard Weinberger]

Am 31.10.2014 um 11:45 schrieb hujianyang:
> 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?

Yes, technically one PEB is enough if atomic leb change is used.
But existing UBI implementations want a second one
and a backup VTBL PEB is good for robustness.
i.e. if the PEB turns bad we have a backup and do not lose
all volume meta information.

Thanks,
//richard
--
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/