[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Killing JFFS under 2.2

Finn Hakansson wrote:
> Hi David and Sébastien,
> Hmmm... I haven't encountered this problem before.
> I would prefer the solution with the mutex around the allocate and the
> write.
> The latest patch where you mark space as dirty is more like a fast hack.
> That way we don't solve the real reason to why it failed. And what if we
> have a flash with a very large "hole"? (Due to many threads trying to
> write at the same time.) Then one could loose a significant part of the
> space on-flash which could prevent JFFS from doing a GC perhaps. There
> are more things that could go wrong. As I see it, there are many more
> pitfalls with this latter solution.
> What do you say?

I too prefer the mutex solution but I think the patch should stay in
because it makes the scanning of the filesystem more stable.  If, for
whatever reason we can't think of right now, a hole appears in the
middle of the data, the filesystem shouldn't be prevented from loading

When an embedded system relies on JFFS to start, the filesystem MUST
load correctly and try to correct the problem, if there's any. 
Yesterday's patch was a step in that direction.

Sébastien Côté