Linux 2.6.23-rc8 for OpenMoko
laforge at openmoko.org
Mon Oct 8 15:52:49 CEST 2007
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 12:31:27AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 08:05:27AM -0300, Werner Almesberger wrote:
> > Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Are the openmoko developers to time contrained to send it upstead
> > You hit the nail right on its head :-( Well, I haven't even had time
> > to help with OpenMoko mainline for some months now, so it's really
> > just Harald who's in charge of that, and he's in charge of quite a
> > lot of things ...
> So do you guys need some help dealing with rmk's patch queue? This
> kind of reshuffling patches and responding to comments is what I do
> for relaxing when I'm too tired of real work :)
yes, please. It would be really great to have you pushing this.
If we at some point find somebody who can do somilar for u-boot, we
really have one big thing less to worry about.
> I can't comment too much on the actual ondisk format because I'm not
> an expert on flash memory, but many revisions it went through for
> different technologies are at least a little alarming. Also the
> ondisk layout for hardlinks doesn't look to very encouraging. As
> far as the actual code is concerned it's a complete nightmare. The
> read/write path is buggy in more ways than it has lines of code and
> needs to be ripped out and replaced by new code entirely, with much
> more use of existing standard linux functionality. It's not that
> dramatic on the namespace side, but that code has quite a lot bugs
> in the software design aswell as layering problems. Add to that
> "features" like variant symlinks that have been NACKed multiple
> times because they're better implemented using bind mounts and you
> get a really nice cocktail ;-)
well, I'm not arguing that yaffs2 is the greatest invention since sliced
bread, but with LogFS in a too early stage, and JFFS2 being suboptimal
for large-page-nand, combined with the performance issues of JFFS2,
there is little other choice we have for now.
Also, I've never argued that yaffs2 should go mainline.
> > We use it on HXD8, which has tons of NAND.
> How large is 'tons'? If it's really going into the Gigabyte range
> I'd suggest looking at logfs, otherwise a recent jffs2 with the
> scalability improvements from olpc should be fine.
yes, tons: think about 3GB or more raw nand :)
and with the statements from Joern about Logfs' early status, it's
really not an option for us yet. With the next generation of devices
I'm more than happy to re-visit.
- Harald Welte <laforge at openmoko.org> http://openmoko.org/
Software for the world's first truly open Free Software mobile phone
More information about the openmoko-kernel