Re: NAND flash support

["Toru Nishimura" <locore64%alkyltechnology.com@localhost>]

> May I join you in your howl?  I too am skeptic about FTL.

A flock of howling wolves is, terifying, or plain annoying for public,
isn't it?

> that the
> commercial file systems that we use are organized around an FTL --
> even though they have a file system that is optimized for NAND use.

That's because commercial advertisements need the words.

We can see a myriad of "filesys" SW products around.  Some of them are
little beyond "access library" which claims "POSIX complaint."  Others are
re-do of FAT filesys.  FAT is, in essence, the name of layout, and the
un-escapable vulnerability can be eased by careful analysis to identify
the critical stage to potentially destroy the whole FS at once.  That's
known a managed ordered write for risk.  Then, it's an instance of
implementation, not a layout.

Filesys stands with the whole OS background and technology context.
We should consider such the commercial products are aimed toward "add-on"
for small scale computer-alike products.  I feel, again, an irony that the
demand for NAND flash filesys has been escalating when mega pixel imaging
device market requires hundreds MHz 32bit RISC SoC and GB class storage.
[/howling]

Toru Nishimura/ALKYL Technology