State of UBI

[David Woodhouse]

On Sun, 2006-09-10 at 12:47 +0400, dedekind wrote:
> Well, what you've listed is not what UBI itself needs:
> 1. "double page writes on NAND" - it needs MTD changes and zero UBI changes.
> 2. JFFS2 integration also requires zero changes in UBI (as long as it is
> sane).

I need to properly review UBI but I've been fairly busy on OLPC hardware
bringup so I haven't found the time yet.

Preliminary impressions are that I'm concerned by the amount of code --
it's _huge_. And I'm concerned by the fact that it doesn't just provide
MTD devices. I had envisaged that it would be fairly much akin to
another partitioning layer, perhaps requiring a few extra methods to be
added to the mtd_info. But it's a new type of device all of its own, and
requires far more to be changed in MTD users (like JFFS2, FTL, etc.)
than I had imagined.

And should the 'static partition' stuff be a layer on _top_ of UBI
rather than an inseparable part of it?

-- 
dwmw2