[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
JFFS is not broken (Was: JFFS broken?)
> email@example.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Our copy_from function was reading cached data that was out of date.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?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org