Hello David! > > Do you know if there is a hard limit to the kernel size? OpenWrt does > not support relocation of UBI as doing so would interfere with wear > leveling. This means the kernel size is more or less fixed if we want > to be able to use sysupgrade. >
AFAIK there is no problem with increasing kernel size here. Unfortunately I couldn't find proper u-boot source for this router, so my claim is not based on actual code analysis. However there was a similar question for WNDR4300(v1) and u-boot definitely allowed kernels > 2 MiB then. > > I personally would prefer to allocate 4 (or even 8) megabytes to the > kernel partition. This would give us a lot more flexibility (ath79 > kernel is already at ~1.8MB the last time I've checked. > That's reasonable, it's better to reserve space for future developments than issue a patch every time kernel size grows over a certain boundary. So in v2 I will assign 4 MiBs here - and prepare similar patch for WNDR4300(v1) to keep them compatible. > > The firmware node can be dropped, as kernel and UBI partitions are > fixed. > OK then, I just wasn't sure if "netgear,uimage" compatibility string is not used somwehere in the install/config/sysupgrade process. If not, then indeed it's redundant. Best regards Michal _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
