This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sourceware.org mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: NAND support


Rutger Hofman wrote:
What made you select UFFS? It licence, or its properties? Care to share your reasons to not use YAFFS?

A bit of both I guess. As I'm developing a platform which will be used for proprietary products, so I have to make sure we have the freedom to keep the application closed. We could always get a license for YAFFS, but I'd rather use something without the need for licensing. Second, it seems YAFFS is quite a bit more heavyweight than UFFS. As we're rather tight on ROM/RAM, I'm looking for a really lightweight FS, and UFFS seems to fit the bill rather nicely.


I would be interested to see a UBI/UBIFS port too. My guess is that the NAND flash interface required by UBI is very small, and it might turn out that porting it to use eCos NAND is trivial. This would mean a UBI/UBIFS in user space though, and I don't know how much work that would mean, and whether it would be supported by the MTD people.

I was thinking about this too, but again, I think UFFS is a lot more lightweight than UBI/UBIFS.


The nice thing about eCos is it's configurability. More options cannot really hurt IMHO as long as share code and subsystems (NAND) wherever possible.

Simon

--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]