On tis, sep 02, 2025 at 16:46, Jan Lübbe <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2025-09-02 at 11:03 +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >> > Yeah I noticed that, _very_ useful. For Infix, if we end up going with >> > LVM, I suspect we won't be able to send all of that info along with the >> > commandline, and will end up needing to figure that out (again) in an >> > initramfs - but for most cases I think it would work really well! >> >> Ah, didn't think of LVM. If mix-and-match is no problem for you, then >> doing it in the initramfs is a workable solution of course. > > If you are thinking about LVM, you may want to take a look at how Android is > using dm-linear for "dynamic partitions": > https://source.android.com/docs/core/ota/dynamic_partitions/ab_launch > https://source.android.com/docs/core/ota/dynamic_partitions/implement > > This is also related to virtual A/B: > https://source.android.com/docs/core/ota/virtual_ab > > The components are "snapuserd" and "dm-user" (which was not merged): > https://lpc.events/event/11/contributions/1049/attachments/826/1562/2021%20LPC_%20dm-snapshot%20in%20user%20space.pdf > https://lwn.net/Articles/838986/ > > I'm not sure what they use at the moment...
Very interesting, thank you! I get why they want something like that for Android, but it does feel quite daunting to deploy for the systems I typically work on. If one was to ignore the business of background-merging of COW data etc. and was just looking to have a way of allocating volumes from persistent storage, do you see any advantages with Android's metadata format and/or tooling over that provided by the LVM2 project? > Regards, > Jan > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
