All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com>
To: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@gmail.com>,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: add minimal amount of reserved erase blocks in Kconfig
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:53:03 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120628205303.676fa2ea@halley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1340636918-7505-1-git-send-email-richard.genoud@gmail.com>

On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:08:38 +0200 Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@gmail.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c
> index f6a7d7a..c2c6db0 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c
> @@ -100,8 +100,9 @@ void ubi_calculate_reserved(struct ubi_device *ubi)
>  {
>  	ubi->beb_rsvd_level = ubi->good_peb_count/100;
>  	ubi->beb_rsvd_level *= CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE;

BTW Artem, I've always had an unresolved issue with this original
calculation... maybe you can shed some light here.

Why 'beb_rsvd_level' is set to RESERVE percent of the 'good_peb_count'?

As the device gets worn, number of 'good_peb_count' will lessen over
time - and as such, the 'beb_rsvd_level' may vary (lessen) over time.

I'd expect a fixed number of 'beb_rsvd_level' PEBs for a given mtd
partition, or more correctly, as Richard suggests, the *sum* of bad PEBs
plus the beb reserved PEBs should be constant for a partition - as I
do not expect more than a known constant of blocks to go bad during
device's (and thus, partition's) lifetime.

Regards,
Shmulik

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com>
To: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@gmail.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: add minimal amount of reserved erase blocks in Kconfig
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:53:03 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120628205303.676fa2ea@halley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1340636918-7505-1-git-send-email-richard.genoud@gmail.com>

On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:08:38 +0200 Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@gmail.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c
> index f6a7d7a..c2c6db0 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/misc.c
> @@ -100,8 +100,9 @@ void ubi_calculate_reserved(struct ubi_device *ubi)
>  {
>  	ubi->beb_rsvd_level = ubi->good_peb_count/100;
>  	ubi->beb_rsvd_level *= CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE;

BTW Artem, I've always had an unresolved issue with this original
calculation... maybe you can shed some light here.

Why 'beb_rsvd_level' is set to RESERVE percent of the 'good_peb_count'?

As the device gets worn, number of 'good_peb_count' will lessen over
time - and as such, the 'beb_rsvd_level' may vary (lessen) over time.

I'd expect a fixed number of 'beb_rsvd_level' PEBs for a given mtd
partition, or more correctly, as Richard suggests, the *sum* of bad PEBs
plus the beb reserved PEBs should be constant for a partition - as I
do not expect more than a known constant of blocks to go bad during
device's (and thus, partition's) lifetime.

Regards,
Shmulik

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-06-28 17:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-25 15:08 [PATCH] UBI: add minimal amount of reserved erase blocks in Kconfig Richard Genoud
2012-06-25 15:08 ` Richard Genoud
2012-06-28 14:39 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-28 14:39   ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-28 16:07   ` Richard Genoud
2012-06-28 16:07     ` Richard Genoud
2012-06-28 16:22     ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-28 16:22       ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-29  7:17       ` Richard Genoud
2012-06-29  7:17         ` Richard Genoud
2012-06-29 14:10         ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-29 14:10           ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-29 14:57           ` Richard Genoud
2012-06-29 14:57             ` Richard Genoud
2012-06-29 15:07             ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-29 15:07               ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-28 17:53 ` Shmulik Ladkani [this message]
2012-06-28 17:53   ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-06-29 12:47   ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-29 12:47     ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-06-30 20:43     ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-06-30 20:43       ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-07-02  6:15       ` Richard Genoud
2012-07-02  6:15         ` Richard Genoud
2012-07-03 10:46       ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-07-03 10:46         ` Artem Bityutskiy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120628205303.676fa2ea@halley \
    --to=shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com \
    --cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=richard.genoud@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.