From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Kemnade Subject: Re: [Letux-kernel] [PATCH 09/32] ARM: dts: omap3-gta04: make NAND partitions compatible with recent U-Boot Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 18:27:45 +0200 Message-ID: <20180725182745.6e436abc@aktux> References: <8dcf3efd3270451314a663c125841ca87ed2b387.1532501910.git.hns@goldelico.com> <20180725080735.GA7467@lenoch> <20180725083305.GB8303@lenoch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/EvVVwApYBji=RIuQBH6+p31"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180725083305.GB8303@lenoch> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ladislav Michl Cc: Discussions about the Letux Kernel , "H. Nikolaus Schaller" , Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , =?UTF-8?B?QmVub8OudA==?= Cousson , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --Sig_/EvVVwApYBji=RIuQBH6+p31 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 10:33:05 +0200 Ladislav Michl wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:18:28AM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > =20 > > > Am 25.07.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Ladislav Michl : > > >=20 > > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 08:58:41AM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:= =20 > > >> Vendor defined U-Boot has changed the partition scheme a while ago: > > >>=20 > > >> * kernel partition 6MB > > >> * file system partition uses the remainder up to end of the NAND > > >> * increased size of the environment partition (to get an OneNAND com= patible base address) > > >> * shrink the U-Boot partition > > >>=20 > > >> Let's be compatible (e.g. Debian kernel built from upstream). =20 > > >=20 > > > That, in fact, is breaking compatibility. =20 > >=20 > > With what? Nobody is using the old u-boot partition scheme any more > > (it is >5 years old). > > =20 > > > So once you are touching this > > > what about relying on partitioning provided by bootloader just to pre= vent > > > something like this happening again? =20 > >=20 > > Well, we define what compatible means here (since we are the vendor). > > And people complain with us. We simply recommend them to upgrade the > > boot-loader. =20 >=20 > Fair enough. Suggestion was to remove partitioning scheme from DTB alltog= ether > and let U-Boot provide one. But you being vendor you decide, of course :) > (I'd use only two partitions: MLO and UBI, latter one with BCH8, and store > everything in UBI volumes. That's a bit more flexible approach) >=20 hmm, so using mtdparts kernel commandline parameter? Somehow it sounds to be sane to not have partition tables in kernel. What only is needed is to have a nice transition scheme for systems in the wild, can commandline mtdparts overwrite dtb? So dtb is a fallback? But I think all that is a future improvement? Regards, Andreas --Sig_/EvVVwApYBji=RIuQBH6+p31 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE7sDbhY5mwNpwYgrAfb1qx03ikyQFAltYpQEACgkQfb1qx03i kyS/cBAAiJDfHrQ1C/NH2CyAl4MhuKBmq0Y5OF9pA7skcJ2o9CFkNEIwVsh0Uhpb +5XaAB5JfiFp5Ec/fF8dbRrr9SN8+n9N4DynnHyxC4GtwR7ENFkojSLtYxYq+iCe UtvJBwdztUOlS5ZU14DcHWVrG4eGXcVAiNU65Fy5NTnrxQMvDSuM7gz9jPWCnhft n/Dy1UZERTnbC15yakXwHY/IGmqTHv/6edVt2SEtsVi2+fFnafwdpZDccAHOxbdb Ukpt1xnUZj7NoNdKsLlXyWHNmAJ3jGWr4JM8CVl+ljV2jetKv97zNFcH1yN+DHQe zD4DMvmG5O9+Op+MX+c0Op32tAslHLS2gDPZ3jS2vkIKMJD6Wy3DAu5NU1BYjqfp APqO96G+1TYejdIiZTD8q/PAPSCp3/pJvJcnJaMHsXY2nFZpTgLKELQ2gB7on3le u8bU3hzQIZS0Jgr3nEI8DVcq6qBLpTfj34KNzq5PwPhFr9oHQ+bBa2y3OD0vsLnL PXJOkXW5DacLuVpnztAdLmY4r+uE9qizAk2TFFN3ytWdipuh4vVqK3JTsl/yUqf4 qHrpXnrL5L+MYW59q6VxhbIdUrWMfjXd8k+gZ6+hGmFf9waWyHf3tGzxpn/1Yby9 sFCv2S/XaSvAMauNxidH9iENvjfne7UQJdBwmPjx+YBwVw1mZxM= =Y4Fy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/EvVVwApYBji=RIuQBH6+p31--