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

Re: JFFS is not broken (Was: JFFS broken?)





jonas.holmberg@xxxxxxx.com said:
>  - 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 out of date.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. 

Cool. I love it when it's not my fault. Thanks for letting me know :)


> - The number of reserved blocks has increased.
 <...>
> But since we haven't had any problem using only 5 blocks before I 
> think I'll stick to that.

Fair enough. The default is overly-conservative because I prefer people to
complain that they got -ENOSPC than to complain that it ate their
filesystem. We should probably document it better, or even make it a config
option.


>  Does JFFS ever fragment inodes when doing garbage collect? 

JFFS1, no. AFAICR. JFFS2 does, when it has to cross into a new eraseblock.


--
dwmw2



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