From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.143]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1HCc8a-0007p3-LX for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:38:10 -0500 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e3.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l11DZrP0021914 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 08:35:53 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.2) with ESMTP id l11DZrhK271882 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 08:35:53 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l11DZrSF006572 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2007 08:35:53 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/1] [MTD] UBI: implement per-volume update From: Frank Haverkamp To: tglx@linutronix.de In-Reply-To: <1170335439.29240.277.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070201102105.15629.61206.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20070201102111.15629.24289.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <1170335439.29240.277.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 14:35:45 +0100 Message-Id: <1170336945.15083.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alexander Schmidt , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: haver@vnet.ibm.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Thomas, On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 14:10 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 12:21 +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > > This patch removes the global update marker support and everything > > related to it. Now we have per-volume update marker bit in the > > volume table. This makes us incompatible with older UBI images but > > this is not a big deal - UBI is not used so widely so far and we > > can afford dropping legacy stuff now. > > Uuurgh. Incompatible in what way ? Does this mean you cannot boot from > an existing image anymore ? No if that would be the case, I would have objected to the patch. What it should do is to remove the need to have the update marker block. Instead of the update marker block Alexander is using a flag in the volume info table per volume to indicate that an update is going on. > > tglx The compatibility issue is that if you want to update a system with a not yet cleaned up "old style update marker" the new kernel does not know what to do with the now unknown ubi-update-volume. The compatibility flag we decided for the update-volume is "reject", which will cause ubi not to accept the mtd. Frank