From owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May 26 02:32:51 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: small@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F40016A8EC;
	Fri, 26 May 2006 02:32:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jim@netgate.com)
Received: from netgate.com (mail.netgate.com [64.62.194.115])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 649EF43D4C;
	Fri, 26 May 2006 02:32:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jim@netgate.com)
Received: from [192.168.2.184] (rrcs-67-52-77-54.west.biz.rr.com [67.52.77.54])
	by netgate.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CDF7280073;
	Thu, 25 May 2006 19:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <HCEPKPMCAJLDGJIBCLGHAEFIFGAA.james@wgold.demon.co.uk>
References: <HCEPKPMCAJLDGJIBCLGHAEFIFGAA.james@wgold.demon.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750)
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <2EFA38F2-77CE-429D-A9DE-9E764EEAA8CB@netgate.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 16:32:46 -1000
To: "James Mansion" <james@wgold.demon.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.750)
Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>,
	Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>,
	Andrew Atrens <atrens@nortel.com>, small@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD's embedded agenda
X-BeenThere: freebsd-small@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems <freebsd-small.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-small>,
	<mailto:freebsd-small-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-small>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-small@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-small-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-small>,
	<mailto:freebsd-small-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 02:32:52 -0000


On May 25, 2006, at 1:03 PM, James Mansion wrote:

>> It would support wear-levelling
>
> I think this might in practice be a red-herring.

If you're assuming CF, possibly.

If you're assuming a lower level flash interface, no.

> If you could convince the system to set aside an amount
> of RAM for dirty disk buffers and to write them all when
> its filled or on application demand (and in a way that
> preseves integrity like soft updates) so that for any
> given flush each sector is written at most once, then
> you can run for years for most CF cards and most practical
> usage patterns that don't really demand a hard disk.

embedded systems are constrained in memory size, too.

> Assume you have cron drive a flush once an hour and
> consider how long until a sector dies, even if the drive
> itself does no wear levelling at all (and I believe some
> do it internally).

internal wear-leveling
CF: yes
otherwise: not typically.

Might want to re-think your argument in terms of a system with 32MB  
of ram
and 4MB of NAND or NOR flash.