From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755317Ab3JCQAt (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2013 12:00:49 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:64014 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755298Ab3JCQAs (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2013 12:00:48 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,1026,1371106800"; d="scan'208";a="411043634" Message-ID: <1380816035.27358.447.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] UBI: fix refill_wl_user_pool() From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com To: Richard Weinberger Cc: richard.genoud@gmail.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 19:00:35 +0300 In-Reply-To: <524D92E8.1030704@nod.at> References: <1380376516-30144-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <1380376516-30144-2-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <1380812414.27358.440.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> <524D8879.1030203@nod.at> <1380814071.27358.444.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> <524D92E8.1030704@nod.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4 (3.6.4-3.fc18) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 17:53 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 03.10.2013 17:27, schrieb Artem Bityutskiy: > > On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 17:08 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> Am 03.10.2013 17:00, schrieb Artem Bityutskiy: > >>> On Sat, 2013-09-28 at 15:55 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >>>> If no free PEBs are available refill_wl_user_pool() must not > >>>> return with -ENOSPC immediately. > >>>> It has to block till produce_free_peb() produced a free PEB. > >>>> > >>>> Reported-and-Tested-by: Richard Genoud > >>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger > >>> > >>> What is pool size, I wonder? > >> > >> Currently it's 25 (UBI_FM_WL_POOL_SIZE). > >> If experience shows that 25 is too low/big we can change this constant. > >> Maybe it's also worth making them configurable... > > > > I if it is a possible scenario that this function will not return until > > 25 (or even 10) PEBs are erased? > > > > Sure. It will try to gain up to 25 PEBs but return if it gets less. > That's why a pool has a current and a max size. So if erasing speed is say, 250ms, then it would take 6.25 seconds? -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy