Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <david@...>
Cc: Rick van Rein <rick@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Tuesday, June 3, 2008 - 9:14 pm

> the alternate technologies that I have heard about are either _far_ less

I will agree with this.


I don't agree with this one.   Erase blocks don't automatically
disqualify a memory as a fit into a flat addressed arch.   You need to
play games at the memory management layer to make it work, but it's
not impossible.
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Rick van Rein, (Mon Jun 2, 8:59 am)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Pavel Machek, (Tue Jun 3, 12:12 pm)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Andi Kleen, (Mon Jun 2, 4:04 pm)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Rick van Rein, (Mon Jun 2, 5:10 pm)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Andi Kleen, (Mon Jun 2, 8:51 pm)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Stefan Richter, (Tue Jun 3, 10:27 am)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Daniel Barkalow, (Mon Jun 2, 3:30 pm)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, , (Mon Jun 2, 1:02 pm)
Re: Future Linux on Bistable Storage, Jared Hulbert, (Tue Jun 3, 9:14 pm)