[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] --cleanmarkers option in mkfs.jffs2
> That doesn't sound like an optimal solution ;-)
> How about adding erase size in the clean marker? That way we could now
> how much free space to expect when writing, and could use that
> instead of the erase size we really have until the block is garbage
I'm not sure it would help in the case where the cleanmarker says a smaller
erase size than the hardware. I think we should just stuck 'probably' empty
blocks on a separate list and finish scanning them before actually starting
to use them.
> BTW: Isn't it really a user error to create an image with the wrong
> erase size and something that seldom happens in real life?
Not always. It's usually been safe to make a JFFS2 image with erase size
smaller than the hardware, so people making images for the iPAQ, for
example, will build images with 0x20000 erase size to match the H3100 in
the knowledge that it'll work OK on the H3600 and others.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org