From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754707Ab1G1GOk (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 02:14:40 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:47967 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751434Ab1G1GOc (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 02:14:32 -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: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, tim.bird@am.sony.com Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 09:14:18 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1311683250-7921-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> References: <1308922482-14967-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1311683250-7921-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2 (3.0.2-3.fc15) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <1311833667.2169.1.camel@koala> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 14:27 +0200, David Wagner wrote: > * The numbering of devices is much easier with ubiblk than with > gluebi+mtdblock_ro. With gluebi+mtdblock_ro, you get one additional > MTD device for each UBI volume, so the number of MTD devices grows > quite a lot and is a bit difficult to understand. For example, > mtdblock[0-4] might be your real MTD partitions, while mtdblock[5-9] > might be your UBI volumes. > It also means that if a new real MTD > partition is added, the number of all the MTD devices exposing UBI > volumes will be incremented by one, which is a bit > confusing/annoying. > As well, if you add an UBI volume, the mtdblock devices that are > emulated on top of volumes that come after this new one will have > their ID incremented. > > * The performance appears to be slightly better with ubiblk than > gluebi+mtdblock_ro, according to our benchmarks (see > http://elinux.org/Flash_Filesystem_Benchmarks_2.6.39) Hi, I am having vacation till the middle of August and I do not have a possibility to look at UBI/UBIFS/MTD stuff now, sorry. When I come back, I'll go through my e-mails and respond. Apologies again. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-fx0-f49.google.com ([209.85.161.49]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1QmJrf-0006H1-2i for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 06:14:36 +0000 Received: by fxd20 with SMTP id 20so1064179fxd.36 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 23:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI From: Artem Bityutskiy To: David Wagner Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 09:14:18 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1311683250-7921-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> References: <1308922482-14967-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1311683250-7921-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <1311833667.2169.1.camel@koala> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, tim.bird@am.sony.com Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 14:27 +0200, David Wagner wrote: > * The numbering of devices is much easier with ubiblk than with > gluebi+mtdblock_ro. With gluebi+mtdblock_ro, you get one additional > MTD device for each UBI volume, so the number of MTD devices grows > quite a lot and is a bit difficult to understand. For example, > mtdblock[0-4] might be your real MTD partitions, while mtdblock[5-9] > might be your UBI volumes. > It also means that if a new real MTD > partition is added, the number of all the MTD devices exposing UBI > volumes will be incremented by one, which is a bit > confusing/annoying. > As well, if you add an UBI volume, the mtdblock devices that are > emulated on top of volumes that come after this new one will have > their ID incremented. > > * The performance appears to be slightly better with ubiblk than > gluebi+mtdblock_ro, according to our benchmarks (see > http://elinux.org/Flash_Filesystem_Benchmarks_2.6.39) Hi, I am having vacation till the middle of August and I do not have a possibility to look at UBI/UBIFS/MTD stuff now, sorry. When I come back, I'll go through my e-mails and respond. Apologies again. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)