Sounds sane to me. The only circumstance I can see where this would be confounded is if someone deliberately writes to somewhere other than the first chunk of a block via mtd (for example) for some clever reason (obscure form of embedding yaffs unreadable data in a yaffs fs) knowing that yaffs will not overwrite it. Nick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Manning" To: Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 4:30 AM Subject: YAFFS: opinions > Hi YAFFSers > > I'd like to ask the opinion of YAFFS-land before I do something. > > One of the checks YAFFS currently does is to check that a chunk is fully > erased before it is written to. In many ways this check is overkill because > the chunk is verified again after writing. There is a compile switch to > disable this: CONFIG_YAFFS_DISABLE_CHUNK_ERASED_CHECK. > > Indeed, the only time I have ever seen this test trigger was due to a stupid > block management bug long since fixed. > > Clearly this check is a bit expensive time-wise So herewith a thought... Most > likely ??? this check will get triggered by some attempt to write to an > unerased block. Therefore I wonder whether it makes sense to only do this > check on the first chunk in every block. This would give some speed-up. > > Thoughts anyone? > > -- Charles > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- > This mailing list is hosted by Toby Churchill open software (www.toby-churchill.org). > If mailing list membership is no longer wanted you can remove yourself from the list by > sending an email to yaffs-request@toby-churchill.org with the text "unsubscribe" > (without the quotes) as the subject. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This mailing list is hosted by Toby Churchill open software (www.toby-churchill.org). If mailing list membership is no longer wanted you can remove yourself from the list by sending an email to yaffs-request@toby-churchill.org with the text "unsubscribe" (without the quotes) as the subject.