[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080401105104.GE7465@logfs.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 12:51:04 +0200
From: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@...dex.ru>
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>,
Adrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@...ia.com>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, joern@...ybastard.org
Subject: Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system)
On Tue, 1 April 2008 12:39:25 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what you mean. In UBIFS we have lprops area, where we store
> per-LEB accounting. UBI lets it possible to have it on a fixed position.
> The accounting is a separate B-tree. Lprops area has its own independent
> garbage collector. You should probably refer the white paper for more
> information.
Fair enough.
The obvious downside of all this is depending on UBI, which has a linear
scan. My goal was to avoid the linear scan completely. It is a harder
goal and I haven't reached it yet. Imo it is reachable and I will
continue going in that direction.
You picked the route of using UBI, which makes a lot of stuff easier.
It is a fair approach and I don't mind you taking it. It has drawbacks,
but so has everything else.
Jörn
--
Anything that can go wrong, will.
-- Finagle's Law
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists