Lpc2000

On Monday 10 October 2005 20:24, Sten wrote:

>
> Correct! If you want to log data continously only, why you want to spent
> a lot of time in implementing a file system? Just write your data
> byte4byte to your flash and wrap around if it is full.

Definitely concur on this point. Using a file system just to do some 
append-only logging like using a chainsaw to cut butter.

> If there are other reasons for using a file system, a flash file system
> like JFFS(2) could be better solution than FAT.

Again, concur, JFFS(2) and other log structured fs are far less corruption 
prone than FAT. However, these fs tend to need quite a bit of RAM for large 
flash partitions.

> Because it is balancing 
> write/erase cycles to your flash other than FAT. 

Most FTLs (eg the Smartmedia one) will effect sufficient wear levelling to 
make this a non-issue.

> Just have look to the 
> Linux kernel (the greatest resource of open-source code in this world!).
> Check the uClinux resources and mailing list for a good (bug-free)
> implementation, too.

Be mindful of the GPL. This might limit what you can do with the code.