Hi Adrian,
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 11:21:07PM -0500, Adrian Panella wrote: > Hi, some Linksys devices (i.e WRT1900AC, EA4500, EA8500,...) have two > different partitions for dual boot, and an additional partition that Linksys > uses for system config (sysconf). > Each of these partitions is of a considerable size (23-37 mb, varying > between devices). > > As far as I could see, the ports already in Owrt/LEDE (Kirkwook & Mvebu) use > only one partition at a time for the overlayfs, so total 23-37mb shared > among squashfs rom and ubifs overlay. > In some cases the third partition (sysconf) is mounted, but in /mmt, not > taking part in the overlay, and so not directly useful for installing > additional packages. > > I believe that a way to better profit all this available space would be to > leave one partition for the rom squashfs alone (23-37mb there) and share the > 3rd partition between alternative boots as the ubifs overlay (another > 23-37mb here). In total we double the space up to a full 74mb for packages, > reducing the need for extroot. > > > Have you found any serious disadvantage on this approach, and that's why it > is not implemented in mvebu/kirkwood? If so, which one? John explained that in another reply to your mail. > > If we leave ubifs outside the image, and only squash in one MTD, does it add > any benefit to have squash image on top of an UBI layer? Erase counters > would be lost between firmware flashes anyway and no other write would occur ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ NACK. As we do ubiupdatevol for sysupgrade, the erase counters will be preserved. Even ubiformat would preserve them, and we never write to ubi-formatted NAND in any other way than either using ubiformat or ubiupdatevol. > in between. On the other hand, in the third MTD (i.e. sysconf) the erase > counters could be preserved between firmware updates, as the ubi block > doesn't need to be recreated each time, and only a ubiformat could be > performed on flash. I don't get what you are talking about. Cheers Daniel > > I'm planning on switching ipq806x/EA8500 to this scheme, and would > appreciate opinions first. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lede-dev mailing list > Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev