CLEANMARKER question

[David Woodhouse]

joakim.tjernlund at lumentis.se said:
> OK, I suspected that much. So after a CLEANMARKER there can be a
> NODETYPE_INODE or a NODETYPE_DIRENT?

Or indeed any other type of node, when new ones get invented - yes.

> Why do you do 2 scan_empty() calls in scan_eraseblock() ?

Consider it loop unrolling. 

> Well, sofar I have only identified one improvement. One could add an 
> isempty() function in the mtd layer. That would improve scaning for 
> empy flash so that you dont have to mtd->read() into a buffer and then 
> check the buffer for 0xffffffff. How does that sound? 

Sounds ugly, but could be effective. Want to benchmark it to see if it's 
really worth it?

If there's a way to safely avoid having to check all the node CRCs on 
mount, that would also help.

The most useful thing to do, though, would probably be to implement 
checkpointing.

--
dwmw2