[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:0.020 / U:3.984 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site