how to use jff2 on UBI layer?
Artem B. Bityutskiy
dedekind at yandex.ru
Mon Jul 31 03:21:33 EDT 2006
Josh Boyer wrote:
> For what it's worth, I personally prefer the gluebi approach. Or at
> least it's design. I don't see why UBI cannot add_mtd_device for
> every volume that is found within the overall MTD given to it.
Just because it's strange from the design POV. UBI != MTD device
semantically => any attempt to access UBI as MTD device is a dirty hack.
> It seems somewhat superfluous to add a generalized I/O layer to jffs2.
> It just doesn't sit right with me.
---------
I have nothing against gluebi as soon as:
1. It works. And AFAICS, we cannot make it all right *for months*.
2. It does not include a lot of stuff like:
if (jffs2_is_ubi(c)) {doh()}
scattered across JFFS2. Instead, JFFS2 must have zero changes in case of
gluebi.
Otherwise, gluebi makes no sense, IMO.
---------
"Something superfluous" are just some subjective words. The objective
things are
1. JFFS2 just works with my patch over UBI: mount -t jffs2 ubi0
/mnt/jffs2 - and you're happy. No need to create strange "fake" MTD devices.
2. There is no half-sane (from MTD's POW!) mtd->put_block() addition in
my patch.
3. After all - I see nothing bad in this "superfluous" thing. It just
adds better modularization. Moreover, now I can remove crap like
#ifdef __ECOS
mtd->point()
#endif
as well as eCos erasure.
just because I can implement eCos I/O in io.c.
--
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityutskiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.
More information about the linux-mtd
mailing list