Re: MTD: How to get actual image size from MTD partition

From: Pintu Agarwal <pintu.ping@gmail.com>
To: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	Kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org>,
	Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
	Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Phillip Lougher <phillip@squashfs.org.uk>
Subject: Re: MTD: How to get actual image size from MTD partition
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 23:54:50 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOuPNLgfJGzp-RJBjydFDL1ZAvOd7=-MgXhnsb2eb_xFSLC66w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOuPNLj+DSigRY_AgHQnGKCK-Vm4ykQBR8UfnTi2UObORTcBFg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 22:41, Pintu Agarwal <pintu.ping@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 17:33, Ezequiel Garcia
> <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 08:45, Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> 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 warn_once on mtdblock
> > > > usage, suggesting to use ubiblock instead?
> > >
> > > a hint in Kconfig makes IMHO sense. Do you want to send a patch?
> > > A warning is too much since on some tiny embedded system with NOR flash mtdblock is still
> > > a good choice.
> > > ubiblock is mostly useful for NAND flash.
> > >
> > > > I remember there was still some use case(s) for mtdblock but I can't remember
> > > > now what was it, perhaps we should document the expectations?
> > > > (Is that for JFFS2 to mount?)
> > >
> > > a long time ago mount didn't accept character devices, so you had to pass mtdblockX to mount
> > > JFFS2.
> > > This limitation is gone.
> > >

Hi,

Just a further follow-up on this discussion.
Whether to use /dev/mtdblock or /dev/ubiblock for rootfs (squashfs)
mounting during boot.

As suggested here:
Instead of using this in kernel command line:
[    0.000000] Kernel command line: ... rootfstype=squashfs
root=/dev/mtdblock44 ubi.mtd=40,0,30 ...

I used this:
[    0.000000] Kernel command line: ... rootfstype=squashfs
ubi.mtd=40,0,30 ubi.block=0,0 root=/dev/ubiblock0_0 ...

The device is booting fine with ubiblock as well.
But, per say, I could not find any visible difference.
I just observed a slight improvement in boot time, but I need to
double-check on this, with few more reboot cycles.

Apart from this what are the other visible benefits of using ubiblock
which can be explained to be management or internal team ?
I could not find any documentation explaining the difference, except this one:
http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/doc/ubi.html#L_ubiblock

Can someone also point me to the respective driver code in case of
using /dev/mtdblock and /dev/ubiblock ?
Apart from theory I also want to check the impact at the code level..

Thanks,
Pintu