Getting big flash onto motherboards. Will CF work? what will
dwmw2 at infradead.org
Fri May 24 06:55:34 EDT 2002
chris at netservers.co.uk said:
> I would guess that these are IDE-compatible then? So I guess I would
> have to use the mtdblock driver to drive it?
No. The mtdblock driver is a vary simplistic 'translation layer' that
doesn't actually do any wear levelling or translation, just lets you use a
real flash device as if it were a block device.
If the hardware in question looks like IDE, you use the IDE drivers.
> Does it have internal wear levelling like CF?
It might. You cannot tell, just like with CF.
> Has anyone seen this behaviour, or had any clues about how or why it
> might happen? We have had the same effect with several different
> brands of CF, including SanDisk. Does this kind of thing happen to
> DoC and/or DoM?
I have no knowledge of the DiskOnModule. It's just like CF in all respects
other than the physical size, isn't it? So there's no real reason to believe
that it must have different reliability characteristics. But there's no real
reason for _everyone_ who makes CF to have implemented it so unreliably in
the first place -- so maybe M-Systems have managed to do it properly -- they
generally do seem to have sufficient clue. You'd have to test it.
The DiskOnChip is a different matter. That allows the system to deal with
real flash, so if there are problems you can fix them. Although in
practice, nobody _does_ seem to be dealing with the problems which
occasionally crop up with the DiskOnChip drivers. I still keep trying to
get our salespeople to find a customer who wants to pay for me to spend
some real time on them, but it hasn't happened yet :)
More information about the linux-mtd