| 1 |
On 03/30/2010 10:40 AM, Ingo Krabbe wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 06:42:15PM -0400, David Relson wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> G'day, |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> I'm porting the software for an embedded medical device from DOS to |
| 7 |
>> Linux and am wondering which file systems are appropriate and which are |
| 8 |
>> not. The device's mass storage is a Disk-on-Module solid state flash |
| 9 |
>> drive. Data is presently written at approx 100 bytes every 30 seconds |
| 10 |
>> but that might change to 100 bytes every second. The device has a |
| 11 |
>> watchdog (recently activated) and during today's session it was |
| 12 |
>> triggered and wiped out my file system. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> Anybody have recommendations on which file system to use and the |
| 15 |
>> appropriate settings? |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> Anybody have suggested readings so I can educate myself? |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
> First I would read about Wear Levelling (Wikipedia). Maybe your device already |
| 20 |
> implements TrueFFS or ExtremeFFS with low-level wear levelling, so it might be |
| 21 |
> enough to just use any other file system upon. Then I would choose a simple |
| 22 |
> ext2 file system, though I can't tell the wear levelling really works. Are |
| 23 |
> there methods to debug that? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> I think the best choose for you might be a JFFS2 Filesystem. Or just choose one |
| 26 |
> from "Flash file system" in Wikipedia. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> bye ingo |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
You should ignore this advice about a wear leveling FS, if your |
| 32 |
Disk-on-module device does it's own internal wear leveling. Check your |
| 33 |
module specs. For example Compact Flash modules have their own |
| 34 |
internal wear leveling and a wear leveling FS will do more writes to the |
| 35 |
flash then necessary. |
Archives