Josh Boyer wrote: > > Hamish Moffatt wrote (Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>): > > > Sorry I should've said 512MiB perhaps: 512 megabytes. > > > UBI attach time appears to be about 6 seconds. > > > > If 6 seconds is as fast as it can be done, annoying but fair enough. > > You should read that thread a bit more carefully. The scan time is > highly dependent upon the NAND driver beneath UBI. For example, a UBI > scan/attach on a 1GiB device on OLPC was 2 seconds.
Ah, I intended to quote the 2 seconds too but forgot, sorry. I think 2 seconds per gigabyte is a significant time, too, but not so much. The followup suggested it was due to the speed of the chip, not so much the driver. > > Adding _another_ 6 seconds to the boot time seems a lot to me. > > You mean adding another "X amount of time depending on factors outside > of UBI's control." Well, yes, that would be a reason to consider whether doing it is a good idea :-) > > I can understand the hesitation, but I think 6 seconds just to find > > the kernel - especially when doing a 'disk resume' - is quite a lot. > > You should really stop quoting this 6 second number. Let's call it 2 seconds per gigabyte, then. > > Note that I haven't tried UBI myself yet. I'm going on what has been > > written to the list so far, as quoted above. > > Maybe you should try it :). I will when good looking figures are being quoted on the list ;-) -- Jamie ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
