[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090104220634.GD22958@mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:06:34 -0500
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
rdunlap@...otime.net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: document ext3 requirements
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 01:49:49PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
>
> Want to document the granularity issues with flash, while you're at it?
>
> An inherent problem with using flash as a normal block device is that the
> flash erase size is bigger than most filesystem sector sizes. So when you
> request a write, it may erase and rewrite the next 64k, 128k, or even a couple
> megabytes on the really _big_ ones.
>
> If you lose power in the middle of that, ext3 won't notice that data in the
> "sectors" _after_ the one your were trying to write to got trashed.
True enough, although the newer SSD's will have this problem addressed
(although at least initially, they are **far** more costly than the
el-cheapo 32GB SD cards you can find at the checkout counter at Fry's
alongside battery-powered shavers and trashy ipod speakers).
I will stress again, that most of this doesn't belong in
Documentation/filesystems/ext3.txt, as most of this is *not*
ext3-specific.
- Ted
--
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