[ECOS] NAND support

Simon Kallweit simon.kallweit@intefo.ch
Tue May 5 11:18:00 GMT 2009

Rutger Hofman wrote:
> What made you select UFFS? It licence, or its properties? Care to share 
> your reasons to not use YAFFS?

A bit of both I guess. As I'm developing a platform which will be used 
for proprietary products, so I have to make sure we have the freedom to 
keep the application closed. We could always get a license for YAFFS, 
but I'd rather use something without the need for licensing. Second, it 
seems YAFFS is quite a bit more heavyweight than UFFS. As we're rather 
tight on ROM/RAM, I'm looking for a really lightweight FS, and UFFS 
seems to fit the bill rather nicely.

> I would be interested to see a UBI/UBIFS port too. My guess is that the 
> NAND flash interface required by UBI is very small, and it might turn 
> out that porting it to use eCos NAND is trivial. This would mean a 
> UBI/UBIFS in user space though, and I don't know how much work that 
> would mean, and whether it would be supported by the MTD people.

I was thinking about this too, but again, I think UFFS is a lot more 
lightweight than UBI/UBIFS.

The nice thing about eCos is it's configurability. More options cannot 
really hurt IMHO as long as share code and subsystems (NAND) wherever 


Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss

More information about the Ecos-discuss mailing list