Proposal: support read-only block filesystems on MTD flash
I'm glad that Phillip has just submitted a similar proposal, making
SquashFS available on MTD flash storage....
; Summary: support read-only block filesystems on MTD flash
; Proposer: Michael Opdenacker <michael@...>
== Description ==
Our flash filesystem benchmarks have shown that SquashFS
exhibits great mount time and good read speeds compared to the other
flash filesystems (jffs2, yaffs2 and ubifs).
SquashFS is a block filesystem, but since it is read-only, it
can be also used on a /dev/mtdblock<x> device, because it will never
attempt to write on any block. The same applies to other block
filesystems, provided they are mounted in read-only mode.
The problem is that /dev/mtdblock<x>, the block interface to
MTD device <x>, is not bad-block aware, and therefore can't be used
reliably to mount read-only block filesystems. It will only work
if you are lucky to have a board with no bad MTD blocks,
as we were when we first benchmarked SquashFS on MTD.
The goals of this project are to make it possible to use read-only
filesystems in a reliable way on top of MTD flash storage.
This could be achieved in multiple ways:
* By implementing a bad-block aware block device of top of MTD,
perhaps not a generic one, but limited to the needs of
* By implementing a generic block device on top of UBI, for systems which
use UBI to implement global wear leveling (without UBI, wear leveling
can only be implemented locally, by each filesystem).
* If SquashFS is identified as a priority, another idea would be
to implement SquashFS back-ends for MTD and UBI. The solution
wouldn't benefit other filesystems though.
The expected benefits are:
* Ability to use Squashfs on MTD flash: tiny mount time,
good compression, good read performance.
* Ability to experiment with newer filesystems such as btrfs,
in read-only mode, of course. btrfs shows great performance
on flash based block storage
* A read-write block device on top of UBI would allow to implement
hibernation to flash, in particular.
== Related work ==
* 'ubiblk' patches were developed in 2008, but never made it into
mainline, and apparently haven't been heard of since then.
We could revive this project.
* "Nand Flash Translation Layer" (NTFL) already exists in the Linux
kernel, to provide a block layer on NAND flash, but its usability
is restricted by software patents.
* It is already possible to use a reliable block device on UBI,
but it is through MTD emulation:
MTD -> UBI -> gluebi -> MTD -> mtdblock
This is probably too complex to be efficient.
== Scope ==
Here is the expected amount of work for the first two parts:
* bad-block aware MTD block device for read-only filesystems
* UBI block device:
These tasks would be implemented in close relationship with the MTD and UBI
developer communities, to minimize mainstreaming costs.
== Contractor Candidates ==
* Linux MTD developers
* Philip Lougher, SquashFS developer
* Development could be taken care of by my company (Free Electrons)
== Comments ==
[[Category:Project proposals 2011]]
Michael Opdenacker, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
+ 33 621 604 642
Bill Traynor <wmat@...>
Thanks Michael, I've added your proposal to the elinux.org wiki here: