Re: [PATCH 0/2] LogFS take two

2007-05-08 Thread Jörn Engel
On Tue, 8 May 2007 01:53:38 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > You seem to be missing the immutable bit. This is really useful > for dealing with buggy or badly-designed things running as root. > I've used to to protect /dev/null from becoming a normal file > filled with junk, and to protect /etc/re

Re: [PATCH 0/2] LogFS take two

2007-05-08 Thread Jörn Engel
On Tue, 8 May 2007 09:39:37 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Motivation 2: > > > > Flash is becoming increasingly common in standard PC hardware. Nearly > > a dozen different manufacturers have announced Solid State Disks > > (SSDs), the OLPC and the Intel Classmate no longer contain hard dis

Re: [PATCH 0/2] LogFS take two

2007-05-08 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 23:59 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > LogFS has an on-medium tree, fairly similar to Ext2 in structure, so > mount times are O(1). In absolute terms, the OLPC system has mount > times of ~3.3s for JFFS2 and ~60ms for LogFS. Impressive number > Motivation 2: > > Flash is becomi

Re: [PATCH 0/2] LogFS take two

2007-05-07 Thread Albert Cahalan
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: [PATCH 0/2] LogFS take two You seem to be missing the immutable bit. This is really useful for dealing with buggy or badly-designed things running as root. I've

[PATCH 0/2] LogFS take two

2007-05-07 Thread Jörn Engel
Motivation: Linux currently has 1-2 flash filesystems to choose from, JFFS2 and YAFFS. The latter has never made a serious attempt of kernel integration, which may disqualify it to some. The two main problems of JFFS2 are memory consumption and mount time. Unlike most filesystems, there is no tr