On Mon, 8 Nov 2021 at 10:51, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 22:18, Ezequiel Garcia
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 13:13, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 at 21:28, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 22 Aug
Hi,
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 22:18, Ezequiel Garcia
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 13:13, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 at 21:28, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 at 19:51, Ezequiel Garcia
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > In other words, IMO
On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 13:13, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 at 21:28, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 at 19:51, Ezequiel Garcia
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In other words, IMO it's best to expose the NAND through UBI
> > > for both read-only and read-write
Hi All,
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 at 21:28, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
>
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 at 19:51, Ezequiel Garcia
> wrote:
>
> > In other words, IMO it's best to expose the NAND through UBI
> > for both read-only and read-write access, using a single UBI device,
> > and then creating UBI volumes as
On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 at 19:51, Ezequiel Garcia
wrote:
> In other words, IMO it's best to expose the NAND through UBI
> for both read-only and read-write access, using a single UBI device,
> and then creating UBI volumes as needed. This will allow UBI
> to spread wear leveling across the whole
Hi Pintu,
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 15:25, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 22:41, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 17:33, Ezequiel Garcia
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 08:45, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ezequiel,
> > > >
> > > >
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 22:41, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 17:33, Ezequiel Garcia
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 08:45, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > >
> > > Ezequiel,
> > >
> > > - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > Ouch, so surprised that
Hi Richard,
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 18:16, Richard Weinberger
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 1:11 PM Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 02:24, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > >
> > > - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> > > >> But let me advertise ubiblock a second time.
> > > >
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 08:45, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>
> Ezequiel,
>
> - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> > [snip]
> >
> > Ouch, so surprised that after all these years someone is doing
> > squashfs/mtdblock
> > instead of using ubiblock :-)
> >
> > Can we patch either Kconfig or add some
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 17:33, Ezequiel Garcia
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 08:45, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> >
> > Ezequiel,
> >
> > - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > Ouch, so surprised that after all these years someone is doing
> > > squashfs/mtdblock
> > > instead
Ezequiel,
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> [snip]
>
> Ouch, so surprised that after all these years someone is doing
> squashfs/mtdblock
> instead of using ubiblock :-)
>
> Can we patch either Kconfig or add some warn_once on mtdblock
> usage, suggesting to use ubiblock instead?
a hint in
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 1:11 PM Pintu Agarwal wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 02:24, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> >
> > - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> > >> But let me advertise ubiblock a second time.
> > > Sorry, I could not understand about the ubiblock request. Is it
> > > possible to
On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 02:24, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>
> - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> >> But let me advertise ubiblock a second time.
> > Sorry, I could not understand about the ubiblock request. Is it
> > possible to elaborate little more ?
> > We are already using squashfs on top of our
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
>> But let me advertise ubiblock a second time.
> Sorry, I could not understand about the ubiblock request. Is it
> possible to elaborate little more ?
> We are already using squashfs on top of our UBI volumes (including
> rootfs mounting).
> This is the kernel
On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 at 12:10, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > Anyways, I will create a separate thread for dm-verity issue and keep
> > this thread still open for UBI image size issue.
> > We may use dm-verify for rootfs during booting, but still we need to
> > perform integrity check for other
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> Von: "Pintu Agarwal"
> Okay thank you.
> We have tried dm-verity with squashfs (for our rootfs) but we are
> facing some mounting issues.
> [...]
> [4.697757] device-mapper: init: adding target '0 96160 verity 1
> /dev/mtdblock34 /dev/mtdblock39 4096 4096
sdevel"
> > , "Phillip Lougher"
> > , "Sean Nyekjaer" ,
> > "Kernelnewbies"
> > Gesendet: Montag, 19. Juli 2021 11:09:46
> > Betreff: Re: MTD: How to get actual image size from MTD partition
>
> > On Fri, 16 Jul 2021
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> Von: "Pintu Agarwal"
> An: "richard"
> CC: "Greg KH" , "linux-kernel"
> , "linux-mtd"
> , "linux-fsdevel"
> , "Phillip Lougher"
> , "Sean Nyekjaer" , "Kern
On Fri, 16 Jul 2021 at 21:56, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> >> My requirement:
> >> To find the checksum of a real image in runtime which is flashed in an
> >> MTD partition.
> >
> > Try using the dm-verity module for ensuring that a block device really
> > is properly signed before mounting it.
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> Von: "Greg KH"
> An: "Pintu Agarwal"
> CC: "linux-kernel" , "linux-mtd"
> , "linux-fsdevel"
> , "Phillip Lougher" ,
> "Sean Nyekjaer" ,
> "Kernelnewbies" , &q
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 12:12:41PM +0530, Pintu Agarwal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Our ARM32 Linux embedded system consists of these:
> * Linux Kernel: 4.14
> * Processor: Qualcomm Arm32 Cortex-A7
> * Storage: NAND 512MB
> * Platform: Simple busybox
> * Filesystem: UBIFS, Squashfs
> * Consists of nand raw
Pintu,
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> Von: "Pintu Agarwal"
> My requirement:
> To find the checksum of a real image in runtime which is flashed in an
> MTD partition.
>
> Problem:
> Currently, to find the checksum, we are using:
> $ md5sum /dev/mtd14
> This returns the proper checksum of the
Hi,
Our ARM32 Linux embedded system consists of these:
* Linux Kernel: 4.14
* Processor: Qualcomm Arm32 Cortex-A7
* Storage: NAND 512MB
* Platform: Simple busybox
* Filesystem: UBIFS, Squashfs
* Consists of nand raw partitions, squashfs ubi volumes.
My requirement:
To find the checksum of a real
23 matches
Mail list logo
