|| ||Pavel Machek <pavel-AT-ucw.cz> |
|| ||Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli-AT-gmail.com> |
|| ||Re: [PATCH 00/14] Pramfs: Persistent and protected ram filesystem |
|| ||Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:20:04 +0200|
|| ||Jamie Lokier <jamie-AT-shareable.org>,
Linux Embedded <linux-embedded-AT-vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel-AT-vger.kernel.org>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker-AT-soe.ucsc.edu>|
|| ||Article, Thread
> > How do you handle hard-links, then?
> Indeed hard-links are not supported :) Due to the design of this fs
> there are some limitations explained in the documentation as not
> hard-link, only private memory mapping and so on. However this
> limitations don't limit the fs itself because you must consider the
> special goal of this fs.
I did not see that in the changelog. If it is not general purpose
filesystem, it is lot less interesting.
> >> >From performance point of view:
> >> Sometimes ago I uploaded here (http://elinux.org/Pram_Fs) some benchmark
> >> results to compare the performance with and without XIP in a real
> >> embedded environment with bonnie++. You could use it as reference point.
> > Well, so XIP helps. ext2 can do XIP too, IIRC. Is your performance
> > better than ext2?
> > Wait... those numbers you pointed me... claim to be as slow as
> > 13MB/sec. That's very very bad. My harddrive is faster than that.
> As I said I did the test in a real embedded environment so to have
> comparable result you should use the same environmente with the same
> tools, with the same workload and so on.
Even on real embedded hardware you should get better than 13MB/sec
writing to _RAM_. I guess something is seriously wrong with pramfs.
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo...
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
to post comments)