On Tue, 2014-11-11 at 22:39 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Please don't (ab)use fastmap. If you really need persistent read-counters use > an internal UBI volume.
Just like you, I do not think the proposed solution is the right answer to the problem, at least so far. But if we imagine that Tanya proves that the counters is the right thing, storing them in fastmap would be the first thing which comes to mind. Just calling this an abuse without explaining (even if this is right) is not very collaborative. Let me see why would that be an "abuse"... Probably because of the nature of the data. Fastmap contains data which only changes in case of writes (well, more precisely, erases, but those usually go are related to writes). Read counters are completely opposite - they stay constant when we write and change when we read. Putting them all to the same on-flash area is possible, but is it optimal? I wouldn't be so sure, I see cons. and pros. Any other reasons? Artem. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
