Jörn Engel posted the sixth version of patches introducing his new LogFS filesystem for flash devices to the Linux kernel. He highlighted some areas of the code that need some more work, and cc'd the appropriate people for further review. Regarding LogFS itself, he noted that one of its big advantages compared to other solutions was improved mount time and reduced memory consumption compared to other solutions, "LogFS has an on-medium tree, fairly similar to Ext2 in structure, so mount times are O(1)." He went on to add that flash is becoming more and more common in standard PC hardware, explaining:

"Flash behaves significantly different to hard disks. In order to use flash, the current standard practice is to add an emulation layer and an old-fashioned hard disk filesystem. As can be expected, this is eating up some of the benefits flash can offer over hard disks. In principle it is possible to achieve better performance with a flash filesystem than with the current emulated approach. In practice our current flash filesystems are not even near that theoretical goal. LogFS in its current state is already closer."

"I skipped the public announcements for versions 5 and 6, but here is 7 :)," noted Vegard Nossum, announcing the latest release of his kmemcheck patch, currently applying against the 2.6.25-rc8 kernel. Vegard noted he is now hoping to get the patch merged into the mainline kernel during the upcoming 2.6.26 merge window. He described the patch:

"kmemcheck is a patch to the linux kernel that detects use of uninitialized memory. It does this by trapping every read and write to memory that was allocated dynamically (e.g. using kmalloc()). If a memory address is read that has not previously been written to, a message is printed to the kernel log."

Among the changes compared to earlier releases, v7 has undergone a lot of cleanup, some preparation has begun for an x86_64 port, error reporting stability has been improved, boot time and run time options have been added, and there have been several bug fixes.

"No cute April 1st shenanigans, just a regular -rc release that happened to come up today because I was waiting for the input layer oops-fixes to be ready and tested," began Linus Torvalds, announcing the 2.6.25-rc8 kernel on April 1st. He continued, "the bulk of the fixes are the usual random one-liners. [...] A lot of the one-liners are some sparse cleanups, which is probably unnecessary noise at this point, but when Al sends me a series I just tend to apply it because his patches tend to be rather careful and basically always correct." Linus added:

"The big thing that is actually *noticeable* to most people is that this should fix the two top regressions: we've had some suspend-resume regressions due to the stupid ACPI _PTS ordering issues, and while the cleanups were left, the ordering changes were reverted. So that should fix issues for some people (of course, the people who had it fixed are unhappy, but regressions are worse). The other thing that bit a number of people and is now fixed (and that also probably often showed up as a suspend/resume regression) was some 'struct device' lifetime changes that broke the input layer. Thanks to people who debugged that one."

"I and the other Kernel.org admins would like to announce downtime for ALL kernel.org machines (this includes all of the mirror machines, the public machines and the backend master). The downtime is scheduled to start on or around April 2nd, 2008 on or around 0001 UTC," began a GPG signed message on the Linux kernel mailing list from John 'Warthog9' Hawley, one of the kernel.org admins. Referencing a recent Slashdot discussion that compared Linux and FreeBSD performance, he continued:

"After much deliberation, research and argument in #korg (along with screaming matches between HPA and I over dinner) we are upgrading the kernel.org machines from Fedora Core 5 to FreeBSD 7.0. This decision does not come lightly to the Kernel.org admins, and we would like to point out several key things that helped us form our decision:"

John concluded, "we feel that we can better serve our mirrors, our users and the community by making the switch, and we hope to have the transition done very shortly."

Following the recent announcement that UBIFS is nearly production ready, it was asked how UBIFS compares to LogFS. LogFS author Jörn Engel suggested, "both share similar design goals. Biggest difference is that ubifs works on top of ubi and depends on ubi support, while logfs works on plain mtd (or block devices) and does everything itself. Code size difference is huge. Ubi weighs some 11kloc, ubifs some 30, logfs some 8." He continued:

"Ubi scales linearly, as it does a large scan at init time. It is still reasonably fast, as it reads just a few bytes worth of header per block. Logfs mounts in O(1) but will currently become mindbogglingly slow when the filesystem nears 100% full and write are purely random. Not that any other flash filesystem would perform well under these conditions - it is the known worst case scenario."

Artem Bityutskiy replied, "I personally refuse to compare a finished FS with handles all the crucial flash features to a non-finished FS. It just makes no sense. LogFS was talked about back 2005 in Linux Kongress, but is not finished yet. Let's talk about it when it is production ready."

"Here is a new flash file system developed by Nokia engineers with help from the University of Szeged. The new file-system is called UBIFS, which stands for UBI file system. UBI is the wear-leveling/ bad-block handling/volume management layer which is already in mainline (see drivers/mtd/ubi)," began Artem Bityutskiy. He explained that UBIFS is stable and "very close to being production ready", aiming to offer improved performance and scalability compared to JFFS2 by implementing write-back caching, and storing a file-system index rather than rebuilding it each time the media is mounted. The write-back cache implementation claims to offer around a 100 time improvement in write performance over JFFS2. Artem went on to note:

"UBIFS works on top of UBI, not on top of bare flash devices. It delegates crucial things like garbage-collection and bad eraseblock handling to UBI. One important thing to note is MLC NAND flashes which tend to have very small eraseblock lifetime - just few thousand erase-cycles (some have even about 3000 or less). This makes JFFS2 random wear-leveling algorithm to be not good enough. In opposite, UBI provides good wear-leveling based on saved erase-counters."

"Now that we are (presumably) approaching the next merge window, can I ask what use (if any) will you be making of the linux-next tree? Alternatively, is there any information you want from it?" Stephen Rothwell asked regarding the tree he started maintaining last month for tracking upcoming stable merges.

Andrew Morton replied, "afacit it's already working. The level of merge and build errors in the subsystem trees this time around is a tiny fraction of what it was at the same stage in 2.6.24-rcX." He went on to note, "there are 60 or 80 "susbsytem" trees hosted in -mm at present," adding:

"I need to find a way to a) get matureish parts of those trees into linux-next and to b) base the rest of -mm off linux-next. I haven't started thinking about that yet. There seem to be some trees which aren't yet in linux-next, some of them significant."

"So this hopefully continues closing various regressions, and most of the changes are pretty small (ie diffstat shows a lot of oneliners). The biggest patches are the trivial powerpc defconfig updates which show up pretty clearly in the dirstat, ie if it weren't for those, the arch/ updates would hardly show up at all," began Linus Torvalds, announcing the 2.6.25-rc7 Linux kernel. He noted that the ps2esdi driver was removed after being marked broken for years, and a new metronomefb.c driver was added for the E-Ink Metronome controller. Linus continued:

"Apart from those, most of the changes really are fairly small and spread out. The scheduler got some tweaking, the memstick driver got some TLC, and cifs and reiserfs had some fixes. The shortlog has more details, but it boils down to some reverts, some docbook fixes, some sparse annotation fixups, a number of trivial patches, and a healthy sprinkling of small fixups."

In summary, Linus suggested, "give it a good testing, because we're hopefully now well on our way towards that eventual real 2.6.25 release!"