From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756262AbaJIQnu (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 12:43:50 -0400 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143]:65276 "EHLO radon.swed.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751372AbaJIQnl (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 12:43:41 -0400 Message-ID: <5436BB39.8030907@nod.at> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 18:43:37 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wei Wang , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org CC: dedeking1@gmail.com, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, open list , Brian Norris , David Woodhouse , Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: Questions about MTD + flash file system References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 09.10.2014 18:40, schrieb Wei Wang: > Hi all, > > I have a question about the MTD device for embedded applications. As typically designers are more likely to use an eMMC or block interface-based flash devices + a block-oriented > file system for the storage system on an embedded system, what's the typical use case for the MTD + flash file system? What's the advantage of the later one against eMMC + > block-oriented file system? > > If an eMMC becomes more powerful, is there any merits that is provided by using an raw flash device + flash file system? Power cut resistance. Thanks, //richard