On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 00:42 +0100, John Crispin wrote: > On 21/01/2014 21:55, David Lang wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Ben Mulvihill wrote: > > > >> The nand driver currently in trunk works fine, provided ... > > > > what is the current status of nand flash support? I asked about this > > within the last couple of weeks and was told that supporing devices > > with nand flash would require major surgery to the squashfs code to > > allow it to deal with badblocks. > > > > has this been done? was I misinformed on what the problem is? or is > > this still a problem and devices with nand flash can work, but only if > > they avoid squashfs? > > > > > Hi David, > > Daniel is working on splitting the mount_root, block, extroot and all > the other mtd/block related tools to a new repo called fstools. While > doing so we are doing some cleanup of the code. i expect this to hit > trunk within the next week. Once this is done we will add nand specific > features to the repo. Once that is done, openwrt should have proper > support for ubi including functional sysupgrade support (using > ubi-format) ... > > John > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
How critical is the bad blocks problem in practice? The above will solve the lack of bad block handling in squashfs, but unless I've missed the point, on a typical board won't the kernel itself still be loaded directly from flash? Or do you assume that the bootloader will be able to handle ubi as well? Ben _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
