lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4.9 069/101] ubi: fastmap: Correctly handle interrupted erasures in EBA
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 08:32:12AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Lars,
>
> Am Sonntag, 23. September 2018, 15:49:42 CEST schrieb Lars Persson:
> > Hi Richard
> >
> > Sorry, I assumed this omission from -stable was a mistake.
> >
> > The timing for our boot increased from 45 seconds to 55 seconds on one
> > chip and 42 seconds to 48 seconds on another chip. The regression was
> > completely fixed by applying the extra patches. The way I see it the
> > first patch is a significant slow-down so the second patch is required
> > to restore performance.
>
> okay, this is not good. Let's put the performance patch also into -stable
> to get rid of that regression.
> Usually I'm rather conservative with adding non-trivial material to -stable.
> As history has shown, Fastmap is special. ;-)
>
> Out of interest, what flashes are these? I'm interested in page vs. erase size.
> Did you give UBIFS bulk-read try?
>
> Greg, I'll send another mail which will state what patches are needed.

Thank you, as I am totally confused here...

greg k-h

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-24 12:51    [W:0.067 / U:0.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site