Re: [PATCH 00/22 take 3] UBI: Unsorted Block Images

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 12:35 +0100, JÃrn Engel wrote:
> Even if such flashes still contain a bootloader and a kernel, that will
> occupy less than 1% of the device.  Wear leveling across the device is
> fairly pointless here.  This is what I designed LogFS for.

Still you need to have a solution for handling bitflips in those
bootloader and kernel areas.

I don't dispute, that on a Terrabyte solid state disk which is used in a
totally different way, UBI is not necessarily the right tool.

> There is some middle ground where a combination of UBI and LogFS may
> make sense.  LogFS can still make sense for devices as small as 64MiB.
> But I'm not too concerned about that because flashes will continue to
> grow and the advantages of cross-device wear leveling will continue to
> diminish.

Flashes will grow, but this will not change the embedded use case with a
relativly small FLASH and the bootloader / kernel / rootfs / datafs
scenario, where UBI is the right tool to use.

There is no hammer for all nails and I don't see device mapper doing
what UBI does right now.

	tglx


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/