Re: [U-Boot] U-Boot and UBI

[Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 08:34 +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 12 August 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> >> > On Monday 11 August 2008, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> >> >> Actually the Samsung implemented the UBI support on U-boot already and
> >> >> has used it internally. The big difference is the code base. It's
> >> >> based on kernel UBI code. Yes it's not fit well to u-boot ecosystem so
> >> >> it created the ubi wrapper for u-boot.
> >> >
> >> > And how does NAND/OneNAND booting with UBI support fit into this? I
> >> > assume that you have some size restrictions for the IPL/SPL on your
> >> > platforms as well.
> >>
> >> It's not yet covered. it's TODO
> >
> > I see.
> >
> 
> Yes, we should make a u-boot within one block size since flash only
> guarantees the first one block as bad block free. e.g., exactly
> (128KiB - 2KiB) size if OneNAND case.
> For this, we need to code or size optimization.
> If this is solved, we can use flash as bad block free device with UBI.

An alternative to that is to have a very small IPL that loads U-Boot to
DRAM as the SPL.  That would require some relocatable support in U-Boot.

josh