On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Loke, Chetan <Chetan.Loke@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Exactly. So what I'm saying is, if UBI also does ftl then you could be > duplicating code/efforts. UBI is already upstream. Now whether it > supports everything we want is another thing. > (and that's why I CC'd its author). So pieces that aren't there could be > implemented. But they also talk about erase-counters etc and I don't > know if I saw something similar in your bucket_struct[or foo_struct]. > May be its somewhere else. I don't think code sharing is realistic for that stuff, as wear levelling and all the other flash specific stuff needs to be done in the same place if you want to avoid having multiple stacked indexes, and adding wear levelling and a copying garbage collector to bcache is going to be pretty trivial at this point. But comparing notes/sharing algorithms could definitely be worthwhile. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
