JFFS is not broken (Was: JFFS broken?)

[Jonas Holmberg <jonashg@xxxxxxx.com>]

> jonas.holmberg@xxxxxxx.com said:
> > I get the following warnings when compiling (maybe it has 
> something to
> > do with the problems I'm having): 

My problems with JFFS was caused by two things:

- Later versions of JFFS sometimes causes flash writes of one byte at an odd address.
  Our copy_from function was reading cached data that was out of date. (Yes that was
  exacly what you pointed out in the "missing cache flush" thread at the linux-kernel
  list a while back). I'm sorry I wasted your time with this one.

- The number of reserved blocks has increased. We have been using a JFFS partition of
  5 blocks for ages. But with latest JFFS we would have to increase the partition not
  to get ENOSPC after a couple of writes. I have read the discusions about this and
  I think I understand the problem. But since we haven't had any problem using only
  5 blocks before I think I'll stick to that.

Does JFFS ever fragment inodes when doing garbage collect?

Best regards
/Jonas

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxx.com