From patchwork Mon Apr 11 09:10:32 2011
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Patchwork-Submitter: Bastian Ruppert
X-Patchwork-Id: 90574
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org
Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(Client did not present a certificate)
by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CD74B6F14
for ;
Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:13:28 +1000 (EST)
Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([2001:4978:20e::1])
by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux))
id 1Q9D9r-0004tL-Cp; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:11:43 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=canuck.infradead.org)
by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux))
id 1Q9D9p-00046I-Q4; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:11:41 +0000
Received: from gate.sewerin.de ([77.75.200.26] helo=sew-notes-gt.sewerin.de)
by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux))
id 1Q9D9n-00045v-Bp
for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:11:40 +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([192.168.5.249])
by sew-notes-gt.sewerin.de (Lotus Domino Release 8.5)
with ESMTP id 2011041111105941-6899 ;
Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:10:59 +0200
From: Bastian Ruppert
To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] UBI FAQ: add "why a dynamic volume is faster to access than
a satic..." chapter.
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:10:32 +0200
Message-Id: <1302513032-3898-1-git-send-email-Bastian.Ruppert@Sewerin.de>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.6.3.3
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on SEW-KOM-GT-01/SEWERIN/DE(Release
8.5|December 05, 2008) at 11.04.2011 11:10:59,
Serialize by Router on SEW-KOM-GT-01/SEWERIN/DE(Release 8.5|December
05, 2008) at 11.04.2011 11:11:03,
Serialize complete at 11.04.2011 11:11:03
X-CRM114-Version: 20090807-BlameThorstenAndJenny ( TRE 0.7.6 (BSD) )
MR-646709E3
X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20110411_051139_575396_7DABDD15
X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 6.20 )
X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message.
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.3.1 on canuck.infradead.org summary:
Content analysis details: (-0.0 points)
pts rule name description
---- ----------------------
--------------------------------------------------
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
Cc: Bastian Ruppert
X-BeenThere: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-mtd-bounces@lists.infradead.org
Errors-To: linux-mtd-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Bastian Ruppert
---
faq/ubi.xml | 9 +++++++++
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/faq/ubi.xml b/faq/ubi.xml
index 48629ea..4a4b3bd 100644
--- a/faq/ubi.xml
+++ b/faq/ubi.xml
@@ -36,6 +36,8 @@
How do I implement UBI flasher?
What does the "ubi_bgt0d" thread do?
How do I speed up UBI initialization
+ Why a dynamic volume is faster to access than a static volume of the
+same size?
How do I debug UBI?
@@ -704,6 +706,13 @@ can do about it but without re-designing. Here are some ideas
here. Indeed, it is easier to solve one problem at a time.
+
+
+
+A static UBI volume is designed to store short blobs of data like a
+configuration file. UBI holds a CRC of the hole static volume, so it
+needs more time to mount a static volume than a dynamic one.