[PATCH v2 2/2] ath79: airtight c-75: use second flash chip

[Adrian Schmutzler]

Hi again,

one comment and a slightly conceptual question:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openwrt-devel [mailto:openwrt-devel-bounces at lists.openwrt.org]
> On Behalf Of Tomasz Maciej Nowak
> Sent: Dienstag, 15. Dezember 2020 18:17
> To: openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
> Cc: Vladimir Georgievsky <vladimir.georgievsky at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] ath79: airtight c-75: use second flash chip
> 
> The flash capacity is divided in two flash chips and currently only first is used.
> Increase available space for OpenWrt by additional 16 MiB using mtd-concat
> driver. Because U-Boot might not be able to load kernel image spanned
> through two flash chips, the size of kernel is limited to space available on first
> chip.
> 
> Cc: Vladimir Georgievsky <vladimir.georgievsky at yahoo.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Maciej Nowak <tmn505 at gmail.com>
> ---
> v1 -> v2
> 
> - add kernel size constraints
> 
>  .../linux/ath79/dts/qca9550_airtight_c-75.dts | 24 +++++++++++++++----
>  target/linux/ath79/image/generic.mk           |  3 ++-
>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9550_airtight_c-75.dts
> b/target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9550_airtight_c-75.dts
> index 34d4c32b3562..c380a109c96b 100644
> --- a/target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9550_airtight_c-75.dts
> +++ b/target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9550_airtight_c-75.dts
> @@ -41,6 +41,23 @@
>  			linux,default-trigger = "phy1tpt";
>  		};
>  	};
> +
> +	mtd-concat {

I think I will change the node name to virtual_flash, as that's the most common case so far and I personally like it more.

> +		compatible = "mtd-concat";
> +		devices = <&concat0 &concat1>;
> +
> +		partitions {
> +			compatible = "fixed-partitions";
> +			#address-cells = <1>;
> +			#size-cells = <1>;
> +
> +			partition at 0 {
> +				label = "firmware";
> +				reg = <0x0 0x1f90000>;
> +				compatible = "denx,uimage";
> +			};
> +		};
> +	};
>  };
> 
>  &eth0 {
> @@ -120,10 +137,8 @@
>  				read-only;
>  			};
> 
> -			partition at 60000 {
> -				label = "firmware";
> +			concat0: partition at 60000 {
>  				reg = <0x060000 0xf90000>;
> -				compatible = "denx,uimage";
>  			};
> 
>  			art: partition at ff0000 {
> @@ -144,8 +159,7 @@
>  			#address-cells = <1>;
>  			#size-cells = <1>;
> 
> -			partition at 0 {
> -				label = "opt";

I wonder what's best practice here:

Many devices keep a label here and just use names like "firmware1", "firmware2" or similar.

Does it make sense to keep the concatenated partitions available under such a name (because the user might want to do something with it) or would it be better to remove the label and thus "hide" the partition (because the user might want to do something with it)?

Best

Adrian

> +			concat1: partition at 0 {
>  				reg = <0x0 0x1000000>;
>  			};
>  		};
> diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/generic.mk
> b/target/linux/ath79/image/generic.mk
> index 177caafa2253..bdc35823c66c 100644
> --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/generic.mk
> +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/generic.mk
> @@ -246,7 +246,8 @@ define Device/airtight_c-75
>    DEVICE_ALT1_VENDOR := WatchGuard
>    DEVICE_ALT1_MODEL := AP320
>    DEVICE_PACKAGES := ath10k-firmware-qca988x kmod-ath10k-ct kmod-
> usb2
> -  IMAGE_SIZE := 15936k
> +  IMAGE_SIZE := 32320k
> +  KERNEL_SIZE := 15936k
>  endef
>  TARGET_DEVICES += airtight_c-75
> 
> --
> 2.29.2
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-devel mailing list
> openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openpgp-digital-signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/attachments/20201216/39cf7736/attachment-0001.sig>