| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20080504130427.583d563c@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 13:04:27 -0500 From: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com> To: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, matthieu castet <castet.matthieu@...e.fr>, Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org Subject: Re: LogFS merge On Sun, 4 May 2008 18:20:23 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote: > > Logfs ignores ubi and does wear leveling, bad block handling, etc. > > itself. Bad block handling in particular is not too robust yet. If you > > expect blocks to rot away after mkfs time, logfs is a bad choice. > > It's a matter of fact that especially on NAND flash blocks become bad > over time, i.e. after mkfs. So that's a pretty crucial feature which > needs to be complete and robust before it's declared to be usable on > such devices. I agree. LogFS seems quite impressive in its performance, however I'm wondering how much redesign and rewrite would be needed in the code to fix the bad block handling. Maybe it's not so much and I'm overly paranoid, but having at least some idea of what it would take might help. You could add it to Documentation/filesystems/LogFS.txt as a TODO. josh -- 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