Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:37:27 -0400 From: "Andrew Atrens" <atrens@nortel.com> To: Olivier Gautherot <olivier@gautherot.net> Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, small@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD's embedded agenda Message-ID: <4475F967.5040806@nortel.com> In-Reply-To: <1148580598.4475f2f677197@imp2-g19.free.fr> References: <3981.1148578569@critter.freebsd.dk> <4475EFC1.1020504@nortel.com> <1148580598.4475f2f677197@imp2-g19.free.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Olivier, Olivier Gautherot wrote: > Hi Andrew! > > >>[...] >> >>>The reason Flash Adaptation Layers came about in the first place >>>is that W95 didn't support anything but FAT. >> >> >>Hmm. I was thinking about partitioning the problem actually. Make flash >>look like a disk and then you can put any filesystem on it that you >>want. Seems a heck of a lot simpler .. and I'm not sure if I see any >>drawbacks to doing it that way ... > > > The drawback is the following: what would happen if you had an application > opening-writing-closing a file in /var/log on a regular basis? The block > would decay with time, with chances that your log even gets corrupted. > That's why Flash drivers have to spread write accesses across the device > (what FFS doesn't naturally do). Also, there is a constraint regarding > the changes allowed: on NAND flash, you can write a 0 on a bit but have > to erase the full block to write a 1 back. > > Don't forget that Flash doesn't suffer from mechanical delays so there > is no harm in fragmenting the filesystem: this would be another feature. > > My cent worth ;-) Yes, exactly... that's precisely what 'wear-leveling' is meant to do .. I think I mentioned wear-leveling further back in the email chain .. Yes, you definitely want wear-leveling. The debate is whether the filesystem knows about it, versus it being managed by a lower level 'driver'. Andrew. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEdfln8It2CaCdeMwRAo/kAJ0R6Wx5XGXscCaiJPKXcAMH2hfkYwCfeOtL s6pOk3K0jcjboPbO/pPnlSM= =95q/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4475F967.5040806>