[Q] ubi->beb_rsvd_pebs calculations
Shmulik Ladkani
shmulik.ladkani at gmail.com
Tue Jul 3 12:01:53 EDT 2012
Hi Artem,
One more thing.
In my patchset I'm intorducing CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_LIMIT which replaces
CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE.
I decided to use a different name as the semantics got different:
CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE specified how many physical eraseblocks
will be reserved for bad eraseblock handling (percents of total number
of good flash eraseblocks).
Whereas CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_LIMIT specifies the maximum bad eraseblocks
UBI expects on the ubi device (percents of total number of flash
eraseblocks).
(Later on, the attach ioctl can support a per-ubi-device limit,
overriding the configured default).
Some might argue that the old name CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE can still
be used, describing the new semantic as well.
What's your opinion on the CONFIGs name change? Is it needed?
Regards,
Shmulik
More information about the linux-mtd
mailing list