On 2/23/06, David D. Hagood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Koen Kooi wrote: > > > Please tell me I'm reading this wrong: 'swap file on the internal > > flash'. You do know that flash is broken after ~100k writes/cell, right? > > And you know that will break your 770, right? > > > > > > I think you are living in the past. Modern flash chips have a write > endurance of greater than a million cycles. Also, wear leveling means > that even if you repeatedly write to the same logical sector number a > million times, you will NOT have written to any one flash location over > a million times. Life cycle endurance is not a reason not to use > internal flash as swap. > > Now, the fact that internal flash is a very limited resource and is not > expandable, as is external flash - that is a reason not to use internal > flash for swap.
Wear leveling on the internal flash depends on FS (i.e., software) support, doesn't it? I wonder what the performance overhead of that is, and also the stability of the swap + JFFS2 path vs. the swap + swap partition path (of course, my ignorance of the swap code shows here; my big assumption is that in the case of a swap partition, the swap code goes straight from memory to blocks on a block device, skipping the FS layer altogether). Wear leveling on MMC is done by the hardware, isn't it? So we're really talking about the difference between swapping to a file on a JFFS2 fs on internal flash vs. swapping to a swap partition on MMC? I really think for most people, the decision is really more of a "commodity hardware" vs. "non-commodity hardware" one. I.e., can you more afford to replace a non-standard part (the 770, or the internal flash of the 770) or a standard part (mmc card) in the event that something goes wrong. Dave _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
