linux-kernel - Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080401111627.GF7465@logfs.org>
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 2008 13:16:28 +0200
From:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@...dex.ru>
Cc:	Adrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@...ia.com>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>,
	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 12:46:12 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> Jörn Engel wrote:
> >Write-back of data: currently not.
> 
> Taking into account this, bad block handling and other stuff I kindly ask 
> you
> not to do these "tricky" things like comparing amount of code lines.
> I believe if you implement all the things, you'll have _way_ more code. I
> believe you'll even have to re-design many things because write-back really
> affects the design a lot. Let's be fair.

Take those numbers with as much salt as you like.  Implementing
write-back caching for metadata actually reduced the line count by 100
or so.  And it did affect the design a lot, I agree.

Jörn

-- 
The wise man seeks everything in himself; the ignorant man tries to get
everything from somebody else.
-- unknown
--
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/