From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QPhfx-0007w7-2U for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 26 May 2011 23:01:01 +0200 Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2011 13:57:53 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from vorpal.jf.intel.com (HELO [10.7.199.161]) ([10.7.199.161]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2011 13:57:53 -0700 From: Joshua Lock To: Darren Hart Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 14:01:23 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4DDEBE38.8090203@linux.intel.com> References: <53e096ed690901bafdc3087b1591db60d16c6d0b.1306218459.git.sgw@linux.intel.com> <1306433070.1777.7.camel@vorpal.jf.intel.com> <4DDE9BC8.8000008@linux.intel.com> <1306439668.1777.10.camel@vorpal.jf.intel.com> <4DDEBE38.8090203@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.1 (3.0.1-1.fc15) Message-ID: <1306443683.5911.1.camel@vorpal.jf.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE Cleanup X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:01:01 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 13:55 -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > > On 05/26/2011 12:54 PM, Joshua Lock wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 11:28 -0700, Saul Wold wrote: > >> On 05/26/2011 11:04 AM, Joshua Lock wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 23:38 -0700, Saul Wold wrote: > >>>> This basic cleanup removes the _ext2/3 overrides from places they > >>>> no longer belong since they did not allow further overrides. In doing > >>>> this the core-image-minimal* recipes can now set a reasonably small > >>>> rootfs so that it's a realistic size for minimal. > >>> > >>> Awesome. Thanks for tackling this! > >>> > >>> Few questions below. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> The new default for minimal is 8M and will be adujsted upward by the > >>>> IMAGE_OVERHEAD_FACTOR (of 1.2). > >>>> > >>>> This fixes the ROOTFS_SIZE usage in the IMAGE_CMD_ code > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Saul Wold > >>>> --- > >>>> meta/classes/image_types.bbclass | 7 +++++-- > >>>> meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc | 2 -- > >>>> meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc | 2 -- > >>>> .../images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb | 2 ++ > >>>> meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal.bb | 2 ++ > >>>> 5 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass b/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass > >>>> index ec0cafd..69f859e 100644 > >>>> --- a/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass > >>>> +++ b/meta/classes/image_types.bbclass > >>>> @@ -21,22 +21,25 @@ runimagecmd () { > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> IMAGE_CMD_jffs2 = "mkfs.jffs2 --root=${IMAGE_ROOTFS} --faketime --output=${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.jffs2 ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD}" > >>>> + > >>>> IMAGE_CMD_cramfs = "mkcramfs ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.cramfs ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD}" > >>>> + > >>>> IMAGE_CMD_ext2 = "genext2fs -b $ROOTFS_SIZE -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD} ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext2" > >>>> IMAGE_CMD_ext2.gz () { > >>>> rm -rf ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz&& mkdir ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz > >>>> - genext2fs -b ${IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE} -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD} ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext2 > >>>> + genext2fs -b $ROOTFS_SIZE -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD} ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext2 > >>>> gzip -f -9 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext2 > >>>> mv ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext2.gz ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext2.gz > >>>> rmdir ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz > >>>> } > >>>> + > >>>> IMAGE_CMD_ext3 () { > >>>> genext2fs -b $ROOTFS_SIZE -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD} ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3 > >>>> tune2fs -j ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3 > >>>> } > >>>> IMAGE_CMD_ext3.gz () { > >>>> rm -rf ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz&& mkdir ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz > >>>> - genext2fs -b ${IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE} -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD} ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3 > >>>> + genext2fs -b $ROOTFS_SIZE -d ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} ${EXTRA_IMAGECMD} ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3 > >>>> tune2fs -j ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3 > >>>> gzip -f -9 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3 > >>>> mv ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/tmp.gz/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3.gz ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/${IMAGE_NAME}.rootfs.ext3.gz > >>>> diff --git a/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc b/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc > >>>> index 1aa45c8..4b68a0a 100644 > >>>> --- a/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc > >>>> +++ b/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc > >>>> @@ -1,7 +1,5 @@ > >>>> QA_LOGFILE = "${TMPDIR}/qa.log" > >>>> > >>>> -IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE_ext2 ?= "131072" > >>>> - > >>>> OEINCLUDELOGS ?= "yes" > >>>> KERNEL_CONSOLE ?= "ttyS0" > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc b/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc > >>>> index 4122a88..9ef242f 100644 > >>>> --- a/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc > >>>> +++ b/meta/conf/machine/include/qemu.inc > >>>> @@ -6,8 +6,6 @@ MACHINE_FEATURES = "kernel26 apm alsa pcmcia bluetooth irda usbgadget screen" > >>>> IMAGE_FSTYPES ?= "tar.bz2 ext3" > >>>> > >>>> ROOT_FLASH_SIZE = "280" > >>>> -IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE_ext2 ?= "280000" > >>>> -IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE_ext3 ?= "280000" > >>>> > >>>> # Don't include kernels in standard images > >>>> RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" > >>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb b/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb > >>>> index 21aaa6c..3246d5c 100644 > >>>> --- a/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb > >>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb > >>>> @@ -8,3 +8,5 @@ IMAGE_LINGUAS = "" > >>>> LICENSE = "MIT" > >>>> > >>>> inherit core-image > >>>> + > >>>> +IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE = "8192" > >>> > >>> I'm not really sure about this, an initramfs that's the same size as a > >>> more fully featured rootfs? > >>> > >> That may be, then we need to increase the size slightly, but this will > >> trigger the correct behavior of actual size * IMAGE_OVERHEAD_FACTOR, > >> rather than the 64M which would be the default, this was to ensure it > >> could get smaller. I don't have a current initramfs size, I will build > >> and verify. > >> > >> > >>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal.bb b/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal.bb > >>>> index aa00e67..743e121 100644 > >>>> --- a/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal.bb > >>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal.bb > >>>> @@ -9,5 +9,7 @@ LICENSE = "MIT" > >>>> > >>>> inherit core-image > >>>> > >>>> +IMAGE_ROOTFS_SIZE = "8192" > >>>> + > >>> > >>> In your cover letter you stated that the minimal image is currently > >>> 9.9M, which means we *need* the overhead to contain the entire image > >>> contents. Correct? That seems a little unwise. > >>> > >> Right, that's currently, we want to see the image get smaller even, so > >> the 8M is an appropriate setting. Currently the actual ext3 image is > >> 13M with 10M of contents. > >> > >> So are you suggested that the 8M size is unwise or the overhead, not > >> sure I am catching your meaning here. > > > > I'm just nervous about relying on the overhead, what if someone sets it > > lower and then the image doesn't fit? > > > > Having the goal of a smaller minimal image is good but in my opinion we > > should adjust the rootfs size when the image is smaller, not before. > > Every argument I've heard in favor of the IMAGE_OVERHEAD was centered > around ensuring there is enough space for the user to actually use the > system after it was installed and booted. Using this single metric to > try and both make up for oversized images and provide space for user > data seems like to cause maintenance issues going forward. > > While our goal should be to reduce the image size, the default image > size in the recipes should default to the largest of the images built > for the supported machines. The overhead should be used strictly for > user data. > So it turns out that if IMAGE_ROOTFS is smaller than the contents the size of the contents is used. Once this if test has been performed the overhead factor is applied. I found this to be a tad confusing (hence all the back and forth here) so have filed a documentation bug about it: http://bugzilla.pokylinux.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1110 Maybe we can have some comments in the code near where those variables are set too? -- Joshua Lock Yocto Project Build Monkey Intel Open Source Technology Centre