[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
David Woodhouse wrote:
> firstname.lastname@example.org said:
> > Sorry, I didn't think about this earlier. Will the "i'm done erasing"
> > signature really work? What happens when an existing sector (that
> > already has this signature from the last erase) start's to be erased
> > but never finishes. However, it's "i'm done erasing" signature remains
> > intact!
> That block is already full of dirtied nodes. Won't we just erase it again
If that's the case, then I put forward the argument that we don't need
"flipping bits" (or partially erased sector) detection anyway (hence
the I'm done erasing signature), as by (your above) definition, only
sectors full of dirt would have been in the middle of an erase when
The only thing to be careful of, would be actual implementation code
that gets tripped up by bits changing in the same location during a scan,
a-la JFFS1- which resulted in a forever loop of kernel memory allocation,
that ultimately resulted in a kernel panic due to memory leaking away.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
the body of a message to email@example.com