On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 01:58 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 01:43:58 AM, Chin Liang See wrote:
On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 01:22 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 01:11:27 AM, Chin Liang See wrote:
On Sun, 2015-12-13 at 16:42 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 02:03:02 PM, Chin Liang See
wrote:
On Sun, 2015-12-13 at 04:14 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 01:49:06 AM, Chin Liang > See > > wrote: > > On Sun, 2015-12-13 at 01:01 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 12:59:48 AM, Chin > > > Liang > > > See > > > > > > wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2015-12-12 at 16:36 +0100, Marek Vasut > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, December 12, 2015 at 07:30:46 AM, > > > > > Chin > > > > > Liang > > > > > See > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > Can you share the final layout before you > > > > > > > roll > > > > > > > out > > > > > > > patches ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, plan to do so but need to away from desk > > > > > > just > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is the old layout > > > > > > 256k(spl) > > > > > > 64k(env) > > > > > > 64k(dtb) > > > > > > 256k(boot) > > > > > > 16m(kernel) > > > > > > 16m(rootfs) > > > > > > > > > > > > The new one would like this > > > > > > 256k(spl) > > > > > > > > > > I'd say you should just call this u-boot, see > > > > > above > > > > > for > > > > > the > > > > > rationale. > > > > > > > > > > > 256k(env) > > > > > > 15872k(boot) > > > > > > 16m(rootfs) > > > > > > > > > > > > The boot partition can be used as ubi part or > > > > > > raw > > > > > > partition. > > > > > > It contains the linux dtb, u-boot and linux > > > > > > images. > > > > > > > > > > Is that an UBIFS partition ? If so, why don't you > > > > > just > > > > > use > > > > > two > > > > > UBI > > > > > volumes ? > > > > > > > > For backward compatibility, it can be raw if user > > > > want > > > > to > > > > stick > > > > with > > > > old way. > > > > > > If you're breaking the partitioning layout anyway, > > > you > > > don't > > > have > > > to > > > care about the "old way", right ? > > > > Actually this partition can be used as raw partition if > > user > > don't > > want > > to store zimage and dtb as raw binary. > > You should never store raw zImage/dtb in a flash on a > production > system. > This is real bad and can result in a corruption in the > future > when > the > system is in the field for a long time. I'd suggest to > just > use > two > UBI > volumes, one for fitImage and the other for rootfs.
Yup, we are trying to move the raw away by having UBI enabled. I presume when you refer 2 UBI volumes, I presume its still single UBI partition?
Yeah, one UBI partition with two UBI volumes -- boot and root.
Ok I grasp you correctly. In this case, I would suggest to opt for 2 partitions instead of 2 volumes. User can just use sf erase rootfs instead of checking for volume offset. I suspect the ubi part will take longer time if we are having one partition only. I shall send out the new revision if this works for you :)
Oh, I see what you're concerned about. On the other hand, you are not supposed to erase UBI partition, since that'd nuke the UBI erase counters and UBI would loose track of how many times each block was erased, which helps with wear leveling.
If you're adamant about two UBI partitions , you can try the trick where you can create overlapping mtd partitions, that way you'd have both options available. (it is actually a legal construction, you can check the kernel MTD docs).
After grabbing a coffee
That's a good idea, though I think I will make do with a green tea (抹茶).
Yeah, beside green tea, genmaicha (玄米茶) is one of my top choice too. :)
and rethinking, we can have 2 MTD_PARTITION where one for backward compatiblity (supporting raw) while another for UBI.
MTDPARTS_RAW 256k(spl), 256k(env), 15872k(boot), -(rootfs)
MTDPARTS_UBI 256k(spl), 256k(env), -(UBI)
We should make UBI as default then. If user care about backward compatiblity, they shall use the MTDPARTS_RAW then.
Try this:
mtdparts=1m(u-boot),256k(env1),256k(env2),14848k(boot),112m(root), -@1536k(UBI)
This will create overlapping partitions "boot,root" and "UBI" .
Nice, let me give it a try.
Thanks Chin Liang