[Buildroot] [PATCH RESEND 1/2] fs/ubi: decouple ubi & ubifs
Matthew Weber
matthew.weber at rockwellcollins.com
Sat Mar 24 03:17:29 UTC 2018
Ben,
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Ben Whitten <ben.whitten at gmail.com> wrote:
> As ubi is a container it shouldn't enforce a ubifs rootfs to be built,
> it is reasonable to have a squashfs ro filesystem within a ubi.
> If ubifs is selected ubi containing ubifs is automatically selected as
> to not break existing configs
What are you thoughts on the usecase of needing the Kernel/DTB FIT (or
other firmware) images also in UBI?
i.e. when online creating the UBI partitions, I can see creating a
single UBI and then just treating it like a raw device to store a
series of blobs (firmware, rootfs & kernel). Generation of something
like that offline feels like a post image activity. However, I guess
that case could just be a new image containerization option which acts
like a general hook to take a series of files (for each create a UBI
container). On target for that option, there would be more MTD
devices vs a single (I'd have to revisit the limitations of a single
UBI vs one for each image as I'm unsure of which is better).
I wonder how often a design would end up using a combination of a post
script and buildroot doing UBI generation where they have to maintain
both? Depending on that, I think I'd argue for defaulting to a post
script
Matt
More information about the buildroot
mailing list