On Sunday 24 November 2002 23:13, Charles Manning wrote:
> First off, please forgive the lack of indentation. One day I will figure
> out how this horrible M$ mail browser works.
:)
> Thomas is correct in what he says below. YAFFS's preferred way of doing
> things is to do the data and oob writes in one hit. Thomas' patches to use
> write_ecc do this (I believe) and probably provide a significant speed-up
> since two programming operations are replaced with one.
Correct. The patch provides the one go programming for data and oob for both
scenarios (YAFFS-ECC and NAND-ECC). The NAND-ECC version skips YAFFS ECC and
fills in ECC code in the oob buffer at the YAFFS locations.
> My current stuff is built on 2.4.18 (we used that as a springboard for
> YAFFS). Maybe it is time to move and apply mtd patches. Suggestions? I am a
> bit concerned that moving too fast on mtd might mean that YAFFS would then
> require new features and lose backward compatibility. Thoughts?
I don't think so. As mentioned already, you can use the unmodified current
YAFFS CVS code on top of unmodified current MTD-CVS code. There is no need
for new features, except you want to utilize the functionality provided by
nand.c
My modifications were just to prove the claims I made in this discussion.
My intention is to provide a equal base for all NAND aware filesystems and to
avoid incompabilities among them. The current MTD stuff including NAND will
go into 2.5 soon.
--
Thomas
____________________________________________________
linutronix - competence in embedded & realtime linux
http://www.linutronix.de
mail:
tglx@linutronix.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
(text/plain)