[RFC/PATCH 0/1] ubi: Add ubiblock driver
shmulik.ladkani at gmail.com
Sun Nov 25 02:36:21 EST 2012
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 18:02:59 -0300 Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've started working on a workload scenario to measure if ubiblock write
> is useful or just plain nonsense.
Please note eraseblock wear is just one aspect of using a standard r/w
filesystem over ubiblock.
There's another potential hazard of using r/w ubiblock, which is the
lack of power-cut tolerance.
Changing a file atomically in ubifs or jffs2 is tolerant to power
cuts (see ).
I'm not sure this is possible in ubiblock case, due to the 1-LEB
writeback cache: if a file (in the mounted fs) is synced, are there any
guarantees the 1-LEB cache is flushed synchronously?
(you mentioned the actual write is only done when a request arrives to
read or write to a different LEB or when the device is released).
> Since read-only ubiblock is less controversial, I'll post a read-only
> version of ubiblock (with an option to use a vmalloced
> buffer to cache reads?).
> We can add write support later, if it's not useless.
> Any thoughts?
Well I was about to suggest that approach :)
I would even split your patch further: the core stuff (with r/o
support), and an additional patch with all the DEBUG stuff. This may
ease reviewer's job.
More information about the linux-mtd