mail archive of the barebox mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Aring <alex.aring@gmail.com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: "U-Boot Version 2 (barebox)" <barebox@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: does beaglebone black device tree need to specify amount of eMMC flash?
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 11:37:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140707093712.GA14797@omega> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1404723200.4587.14.camel@weser.hi.pengutronix.de>

Hi Lucas,

On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 10:53:20AM +0200, Lucas Stach wrote:
> This has nothing to do with barebox, but I feel this needs an answer as
> a lot of misinformation is spread here.
> 

Thanks for your answer.

Yes, it's off-topic but I always feel bad when I heard "eMMC".

> Am Montag, den 07.07.2014, 09:06 +0200 schrieb Alexander Aring:
> [...]
> > 
> > btw.: that's why eMMC is evil.
> > 
> > Raw-Flash:
> > 
> > Disadvantage:
> >  - you can't replace it.
> > 
> > Advantage:
> >  - no mcu in the middle, access the raw Flash.
> 
> This isn't an advantage. If your not working for the NAND flash
> manufacturer you will have an extremely hard time getting the wear
> leveling parameters right. Having this abstracted behind an MCU that
> actually know about the flash chip behind it is a good thing.
> 

yes, but I think that a mtd filesystem can do a better scheduling of
erase/write/read cycles than the integrated mcu with an abstracted block
device.

I need to test it myself, to see what the mcu exactly do and this
depends on manufacturer.

> > 
> > 
> > - MMC/SD:
> > 
> > Disadvantage:
> >  - mcu in the middle, abstract block device. OS doesn't know about this.
> 
> No disadvantage, see above.
> 
> > 
> > Advantage:
> >  - you can replace it.
> > 
> > 
> > Combines these Disadvantage and Advantage you will get:
> > 
> > Disadvantage:
> >  - mcu in the middle, abstract block device. OS doesn't know about this.
> >  - you can't replace it.
> > 
> > Advantage:
> >  - maybe a little bit cheaper...
> >  - maybe avoid some bad connections (never expired by using sd cards)
> > 
> You are neglecting the fact that the eMMC interface can be driven with a
> lot higher clock speeds compared to an SD card. Also most eMMCs have an
> interface width of 8 bits, which is double the SDs 4 bit.
> 

okay, I didn't know that. Does barebox use the 8 bit interface at the
moment?

> This amounts to a lot more raw speed on the interface side and most
> eMMCs are actually capable of supplying data at those rates.
> 
> Also eMMC provides some really useful additional features like the boot
> partitions and health checks.
> 
> While SD cards may be convenient for the casual hobbyist user when it
> comes to real embedded devices, where speed and reliability matters,
> eMMC has a huge lead.
> 
> Raw NAND is only an option if your device manufacturing runs are big
> enough that the lower price for NAND stacks up enough to make up the
> additional development time (cost) you need to get things right. Note
> there is a big difference here between getting it working and getting it
> right.
> 

So now I have the question about "Why they don't make a new sd/mmc card
holder standard and sells replaceable cards". I could say that to every
electronic device, but maybe it's better that there is no new standard.
:-)

- Alex

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-07  9:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-05 10:47 Robert P. J. Day
2014-07-07  6:53 ` Sascha Hauer
2014-07-07  7:06   ` Alexander Aring
2014-07-07  8:53     ` Lucas Stach
2014-07-07  9:37       ` Alexander Aring [this message]
2014-07-07 21:05     ` Holger Schurig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140707093712.GA14797@omega \
    --to=alex.aring@gmail.com \
    --cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox