The reason for this is to move away from the idea that littlefs is
strictly bound to CRCs and make the code more welcoming to other
checksum types, such as SHA256, etc.
Of course, changing the name doesn't really do anything. littlefs
actually _is_ strictly bound to CRCs in a couple ways that other
filesystems aren't. These would need to have workarounds for other
checksum types:
- We leverage the parity-preserving nature of (some) CRCs to not have
to also calculate the parity of metadata in rbyd commits.
- We leverage the linearity of CRCs to retroactively flip the
perturb bit in the cksum tag without needing to recalculate the
checksum. Though the fact we need to do this is because of how we
use parity above, so this may just not be needed for non-CRC
checksums.
- The plans for global-CRCs (not yet implemented) rely heavily on the
mathematical properties of CRC polynomials. This doesn't mean
global-CRCs can't work with other checksums, you would just need to
find a different type of polynomial.
Christopher Haster
7031d6e1b3