IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] draft-rahul-roll-rpl-observations-00 Section 2.1: Wear leveling

Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 22 March 2018 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <rahul.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C760D12E8A5 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T-7O4eYEIz-0 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x235.google.com (mail-wr0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DA5212D956 for <roll@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x235.google.com with SMTP id 80so8377809wrb.2 for <roll@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date:subject:message-id :references:in-reply-to:to; bh=BNa3M2Lr1Ed7wLNAIVf0yZmUNiuQA8H5CuyIitOoheU=; b=Zgik604GqqJ7DiQcTLfSMuwGFO1vE9TTLQ/VqX82wBJUCHcS6EPRD0zQdXOqu1FCKR qQKKEDoqOEDK6obdW1hQ7MJLPLLpQXVpGGwTGYF8zXiLrrVCd33cZh0L76GgHF5Uwg0a 88jxb/Q8uHMoGnJaE7KkUXxoFnZdwZCX//XwDKgD0FXpqcgkjtmQuxFhxa1WbLTiv+1M InyjMdFFXKI2d+tWyfPSsopob9Xk/k1e/awMmGT3F1ARPu26n2YBMpdpeExMQm6G8qao JwRumhUd5ziepq26bYth2FSyB8WTbbKtZF0CVLWgU/3klGjqZaV6SXqfQdmRoaIY8PoV 7gLQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:date :subject:message-id:references:in-reply-to:to; bh=BNa3M2Lr1Ed7wLNAIVf0yZmUNiuQA8H5CuyIitOoheU=; b=j5KKmwFVOyrKCwXGQAHdQpSDVpzOImqJms+FpY57i4SKlVHOfm3Px8Bn+zPX3ITlgh AwXNNPD3MIj4ok0AzU6PUesmdxSsZ2u5Q7Pkuwdjsoar/UffCMCgyBbzhJPyRAswk7b6 vlymt4aEn9HnTB0iS+7AMEyujWJ4D8R5P9Rp2fD5VMl5tg8V3mUQFmwQZtq9p+pl3j6f HDiHYzec4QsPBDF4pv53LCgJLpYPz8uMg/i7F+jilG667Y694EZXKADuVxDXmojdlZ8Z hkyqE/YqhhWJdn/F6jeSlByRrX63gLQl28SYdvYThZW+fSdgdYA0chWXMoW+JJ3kKGT8 LAuA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GSnPDqXrFjiNZ/xAZkeifyrNtkGmf4rLUA13JCAZy4aeAxXa93 1C/5ARNqn8kjDT0IQIsudIP26rXT
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsfuo2COGB7DgEOPOzwtW4CG+7Y18OQqZlsf83Ldj6Ds/SNoFUBS7jbmZzabf48RYeF0jr46w==
X-Received: by 10.223.159.66 with SMTP id f2mr19732619wrg.113.1521738483727; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.17.1.104] ([80.5.95.90]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r19sm8938133wmd.48.2018.03.22.10.08.02 for <roll@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:08:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:08:02 +0000
Message-Id: <0F0CEAAE-2A8C-4800-8931-216786905863@gmail.com>
References: <8EC2893F-731B-439D-86FE-984505349D8D@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <8EC2893F-731B-439D-86FE-984505349D8D@tzi.org>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15D100)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/ST-dR_pGcgO243zdI-Yc0nnlq04>
Subject: Re: [Roll] draft-rahul-roll-rpl-observations-00 Section 2.1: Wear leveling
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:08:10 -0000

Thanks Carsten for the feedback. Yes a full erase / write cycle per store is not optimal... We are doing that and there was reason to do that i could not recollect now.. I will reply back again with the details soon.

Thanks,
Rahul 

> On 22-Mar-2018, at 10:28 AM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
> Today, at the mike, I asked about wear leveling.
> 
> The numbers in 2.1 seem to assume you do a full erase/write cycle per store operation.
> That is not a good way to use Flash storage.  Obviously, for true wear leveling you need a bit more flash space (and a bit more code, which also needs flash space), but then there already are other items that you want to commit to stable storage on a somewhat regular basis.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email