Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 14:39:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 14:38:51 -0500 Received: from imladris.demon.co.uk ([193.237.130.41]:21513 "EHLO imladris.demon.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 14:38:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 19:37:46 +0000 (GMT) From: David Woodhouse To: Amit D Chaudhary cc: Subject: Re: RAMFS, CRAMFS and JFFS2(was Re: /linuxrc query) In-Reply-To: <3ABB8F57.3000800@muppetlabs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Amit D Chaudhary wrote: > Hi David, > > I did consider CRAMFS and JFFS2 when it was announced on the mtd list. > Conserving flash over system ram is more relevant. Our reasons are below: > > RAMFS v/s CRAMFS > 1. RAMFS is just more stable in terms of less complexity, less bugs reported > over the time, etc. > 2. RAMFS is a fairly robust filesystem and all features required as far as I can > tell. I'm not aware of any bugs being found in cramfs recently - unless you wanted to use it on Alpha (or anything else where PAGE_SIZE != the hard-coded 4096 in mkcramfs.c). I wouldn't avoid it for those reasons - although if you're _really_ short of flash space, the same argument applies as for JFFS2 - a single compression stream (tar.gz) will be smaller than compressing individual pages like JFFS2 and cramfs do. > I might be wrong and hence would welcome any suggestions. Given your stated constraints - you're very short of flash and don't care too much about the RAM you use, you've may have made the same choice I would have done. Bearing in mind that you have to take into account the overhead of the initrd which does the untarring - what's the total size of the initrd + tarball on the flash, and what size would the corresponding cramfs be? If you could fit your root filesystem into a cramfs on the flash, I'd do that instead and use ramfs for the parts which need to be writeable. -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/