>Hi Anthony.
>
> >>> 2. No speed improvement, most likely there would be a speed
> >>> decrease.
>
> >>> file system request -> UMSDOS -> FATFS -> drive
>
> >>> vs.
>
> >>> file system request -> EXT2 -> loop device driver ->
> >>> FATFS -> drive
>
> >> Show me the numbers, I'm not convinced.
>
> > You're adding another layer to the I/O flow and you expect a speed
> > up???
>
>In my experience, EXT2 + the lop device driver combined ARE faster
>than the current UMSDOS layer, so there would be a definate speed
>increase from making that change...
>
>My analysis indicates that the really slow section of the UMSDOS
>driver is its filename translation routine, although I'm not sure why.
>That's why I suggested using VFAT as the underlying file system rather
>than MSDOS - it eliminates that routine completely since VFAT can
>already handle long filenames, so doesn't need it.
>
This I would agree with, it would also preserve the long filenames under
Win9x/NT. Though I'd suggest a DOS compatability mode using the current
name translations.
>Best wishes from Riley.
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/