From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752943Ab1F2GZE (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2011 02:25:04 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:41326 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751097Ab1F2GY4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2011 02:24:56 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com To: David Wagner Cc: Matthieu CASTET , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:25:47 +0300 In-Reply-To: <4E09F3F1.7080109@free-electrons.com> References: <1308922482-14967-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1308922482-14967-2-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1309202771.24805.11.camel@koala> <4E09EA52.8090006@parrot.com> <4E09F3F1.7080109@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2 (3.0.2-2.fc15) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1309328751.23597.109.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 17:32 +0200, David Wagner wrote: > On 06/28/2011 04:50 PM, Matthieu CASTET wrote: > > Hi, > > > [...] > > Also what are the advantage against gluebi + mtdblock_ro ? > > The main advantage is a reduced number of layers ; I must say I cannot > see much more for now. I could add that the Kconfig help of gluebi > advises not to use it except when needed by legacy software. Well, I think Matthieu has a valid poit, you should try to come up with a set of advantages, otherwise why would this drivers be needed? Why would people spend time reviewing it? May be less memcpy's? Do we do an extra memcpy in gluebi? If yes, can we avoid doing this. Anyway, please, try to sell this driver a bit better. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pz0-f49.google.com ([209.85.210.49]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1QboCp-0004cK-Oy for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 06:25:01 +0000 Received: by pzk28 with SMTP id 28so711132pzk.36 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 23:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI From: Artem Bityutskiy To: David Wagner Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:25:47 +0300 In-Reply-To: <4E09F3F1.7080109@free-electrons.com> References: <1308922482-14967-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1308922482-14967-2-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1309202771.24805.11.camel@koala> <4E09EA52.8090006@parrot.com> <4E09F3F1.7080109@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1309328751.23597.109.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Matthieu CASTET Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 17:32 +0200, David Wagner wrote: > On 06/28/2011 04:50 PM, Matthieu CASTET wrote: > > Hi, > > > [...] > > Also what are the advantage against gluebi + mtdblock_ro ? > > The main advantage is a reduced number of layers ; I must say I cannot > see much more for now. I could add that the Kconfig help of gluebi > advises not to use it except when needed by legacy software. Well, I think Matthieu has a valid poit, you should try to come up with a set of advantages, otherwise why would this drivers be needed? Why would people spend time reviewing it? May be less memcpy's? Do we do an extra memcpy in gluebi? If yes, can we avoid doing this. Anyway, please, try to sell this driver a bit better. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy