From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757348Ab0FIJtZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 05:49:25 -0400 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:53841 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757299Ab0FIJtX (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 05:49:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 10:58:02 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: "Yedire, Sandeep" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Ext2/3 Filesystem Analysis Message-ID: <20100609105802.62d2ddce@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > With Ext3: > Filesystem block at Sector 0 is being updated more frequently at ratio > of 5.5 to 6 times that of data block. > Filesystem block(super block copies) are being updated at around > 1.5times the frequency compared to data block. > > Has anyone come across this kind of behaviour with these filesystems > on NAND Flash? ext2/3 are not intended to be used with flash - they do not wear level, in fact the journal and some other blocks will get very heavily used compared to other blocks. See the MTD drivers and related file systems/mapping layers (UBIFS etc)