[lkml]   [1998]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: why umsdos?
Hi Anthony.

>>> 2. No speed improvement, most likely there would be a speed
>>> decrease.

>>> file system request -> UMSDOS -> FATFS -> drive

>>> vs.

>>> file system request -> EXT2 -> loop device driver ->
>>> FATFS -> drive

>> Show me the numbers, I'm not convinced.

> You're adding another layer to the I/O flow and you expect a speed
> up???

In my experience, EXT2 + the lop device driver combined ARE faster
than the current UMSDOS layer, so there would be a definate speed
increase from making that change...

My analysis indicates that the really slow section of the UMSDOS
driver is its filename translation routine, although I'm not sure why.
That's why I suggested using VFAT as the underlying file system rather
than MSDOS - it eliminates that routine completely since VFAT can
already handle long filenames, so doesn't need it.

Best wishes from Riley.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.036 / U:2.460 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site