From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270832AbTG0PRn (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 11:17:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270847AbTG0PRn (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 11:17:43 -0400 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:32399 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270832AbTG0PRV (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 11:17:21 -0400 From: Bernd Eckenfels To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Reiser4 status: benchmarked vs. V3 (and ext3) In-Reply-To: <1059315409.10692.215.camel@sonja> X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.5.19-20030610 ("Darts") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.20-xfs (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 17:32:34 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article <1059315409.10692.215.camel@sonja> you wrote: > A device layer that shuffles around sectors would have interesting > semantics, like hardly being portable because one would have to use > exactly the same device driver with the same parameters to use the > filesystem and thus retrieve the data. In fact it should not shuffle around, but support the filesystem in requesting new free blocks. But I see that FS must support the flash by for example beeing prepared to move often used blocks (super blocks, bitmaps, ... ) around. Greetings Bernd -- eckes privat - http://www.eckes.org/ Project Freefire - http://www.freefire.org/