Hy Tim, 1. PTAL at: https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@nuttx.apache.org/msg06767.html and see if the issues you found with SMARTFS can be solved with the proper configurations and commands.
2. If using FAT, as Greg suggested, take care of respecting the 8.3 convention name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.3_filename#:~:text=An%208.3%20filename%20(also%20called,for%20compatibility%20with%20legacy%20programs . I am kind of getting alert about filename sizes and conventions 😆 Em qua., 25 de ago. de 2021 às 15:06, Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> escreveu: > > > To answer your question – which was the original intent of this help > request, the aim is fundamentally data logging. Users will log data (at > 20Hz, say; multiple parameters) then occasionally pull them off for > external analysis, delete, and start again. So I don’t think wear levelling > is actually an issue; just speed and ease of pulling data off to spit out > over USB or Bluetooth LE, on an occasional basis. > > Hmmm.. If you don't care about about wear-leveling but you want to get > data from USB (via USB MSC?), then you should consider FAT. You can > export and mount the SPI FLASH-based FAT file system on any host just as > though it were a any other USB FLASH driver. > > FLASH file systems only exist to handle wear-leveling and bad block > handling. (I think I do have some ancient FAT bad block logic somewhere > that I never got merged upstream). > > >
