Re: XO still bootable with incomplete fs-update
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 1:56 AM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: We found that erase commands sent to certain microSD cards would fail. We removed the erase commands from the start of fs-update. This would have worked against you. Ouch! I hadn't realized we had removed the commands entirely. You might modify zhashfs further to write an empty zero block first, then write the remaining blocks, then write the real zero block. Yeah, I think we should do that. The incomplete fs-update run won't boot is a valuable sanity feature. Sridhar - the changes (and the fix James proposes) apply to the internal organization of the .zd files. So the fix willbe in the OOB toolchain. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO still bootable with incomplete fs-update
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:36:15AM -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote: Sridhar - the changes (and the fix James proposes) apply to the internal organization of the .zd files. So the fix willbe in the OOB toolchain. Applied, #11776. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO still bootable with incomplete fs-update
On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 09:46 +1000, James Cameron wrote: On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:36:15AM -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote: Sridhar - the changes (and the fix James proposes) apply to the internal organization of the .zd files. So the fix willbe in the OOB toolchain. Applied, #11776. Is OOB version 4.1 going to receive the same treatment? Jerry ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO still bootable with incomplete fs-update
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 06:58:00PM -0500, Jerry Vonau wrote: On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 09:46 +1000, James Cameron wrote: On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:36:15AM -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote: Sridhar - the changes (and the fix James proposes) apply to the internal organization of the .zd files. So the fix willbe in the OOB toolchain. Applied, #11776. Is OOB version 4.1 going to receive the same treatment? Not for me to say. I don't recall what v4.1 means. I applied the patch to the master branch. The maintainer of v4.1 can apply it. The patch applies with fuzz to v4.1, and should work the same despite the other changes made to zhashfs since. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
XO still bootable with incomplete fs-update
Perhaps I misunderstood, but I thought that fs-update had been modified to make the XO unbootable unless the process was allowed to complete. I think this was achieved by blanking the first block and only writing it properly at the end. I am finding that XOs that have received an incomplete fs-update (e.g. if power was cut in the middle) still proceed to the boot process. Given that the OS hasn't been completely written, the behaviour after that is unpredictable. This can result in countless problems in the field. Is there a transparent and foolproof way to ensure that the XO will only boot if the OS writing is allowed to complete? This applies to a NANDblaster receive as well. Thanks, Sridhar Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO still bootable with incomplete fs-update
No, fs-update was not modified for this. zhashfs in olpc-os-builder was modified to place the zero block last in the .zd file. This would have worked in your favour. We found that erase commands sent to certain microSD cards would fail. We removed the erase commands from the start of fs-update. This would have worked against you. You might modify zhashfs further to write an empty zero block first, then write the remaining blocks, then write the real zero block. What you are seeing is the re-use of the previous installation's partition table against the new installation. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
