On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 06:15:04PM +0200, Carsten Otte wrote: > The clear advantage of using cramfs on embedded platforms over using the > ext2 stuff is, that one can choose per-file whether it should be > compressed or xip. > The real key is, to put both our ext2 stuff and the cramfs xip on a > common infrastructure. They should use the same file operations and > adress space operations for xip files rather then replicating each > others bugs. > If cramfs shall be kept simple, it might be time to fork that file > system. I don't see that need arise from the proposed solution. It can > become clean and sane with a little work on it. Look at the xip > extensions for ext2 for example, they don't bloat the filesystem too much.
ext2 is a multi-purpose block based filesystem and you add support for another bit of storage. cramfs is very specialized to storing read-only compressed data on block devices. The embedded people already use them on flash which is a little dumb, but now we add even more cludge for a non-block based access. The right way to architect xip for flash-based devices is to implement a generic get_xip_page for mtd-based devices and integrate that into an existing flash filesystem or write a simple new flash filesystem tailored to that use case. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/