| Message ID | 20180818120159.27671-1-mail@david-bauer.net |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Mathias Kresin |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [OpenWrt-Devel] ath79: fix SUPPORTED_DEVICES for TL-MR3020 | expand |
David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> wrote: > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of > mismatching supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" > which is missing in the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is > unaffected, as the image contains the old string for ar71xx and > the new one coming from the device-tree. These were removed as "it was intended to be required to force when switching "architectures"" I disagreed then, but it got railed through, so it's good to see I'm not the only one who thought you should be able to upgrade from ar71xx to ath79 on the same hardware.... See also https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/1222 Cheers, Karl P > > Signed-off-by: David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> > --- > target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk index > 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 > DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport > TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 > - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 > + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 > endef > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > -- > 2.18.0 > > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
On 8/19/18 12:13 AM, Karl Palsson wrote: > These were removed as "it was intended to be required to force > when switching "architectures"" I disagreed then, but it got > railed through, so it's good to see I'm not the only one who > thought you should be able to upgrade from ar71xx to ath79 on the > same hardware....> See also https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/1222 I understand the point of signaling people that things are most like going to break with the target-switch. I was expecting the compatible string to be there exactly for this reason as the compatible string for ath79 is automatically added from the device-tree. I'm not sure which approach is "better". On one hand, this makes upgrading via LuCI (with settings not preserved) not possible. I would expect people to read release nodes and follow the path accordingly, on the other hand you could argue one who is reading release notes is also capable of upgrading via CLI/SSH. Middle ground would be (in my opinion) to allow forced sysupgrade via LuCI, but I'm not sure how much effort this would be. Best wishes David
On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 5:04 AM David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> wrote: > > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching > supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in > the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image > contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the > device-tree. NAK from me. > > Signed-off-by: David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> > --- > target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > index 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 > DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport > TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 > - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 > + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 > endef > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > -- > 2.18.0 > > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
18.08.2018 14:01, David Bauer: > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching > supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in > the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image > contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the > device-tree. > > Signed-off-by: David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> > --- > target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > index 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 > DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport > TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 > - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 > + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 > endef > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 I was the opinion it's the ar71xx boardname and it's added to allow an update from the ar71xx image. But lets do the obvious and ask the author. Dmitry, was the SUPPORTED_DEVICES added to allow an update from the ar71xx image? Mathias
Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 5:04 AM David Bauer > <mail@david-bauer.net> wrote: > > > > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching > > supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in > > the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image > > contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the > > device-tree. > NAK from me. No explanation? Just NAK? That's helpful. Sincerely, Karl P
вс, 19 авг. 2018 г. в 12:28, Mathias Kresin <dev@kresin.me>: > > 18.08.2018 14:01, David Bauer: > > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching > > supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in > > the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image > > contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the > > device-tree. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> > > --- > > target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > index 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 > > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 > > DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport > > TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 > > - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 > > + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 > > endef > > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > I was the opinion it's the ar71xx boardname and it's added to allow an > update from the ar71xx image. But lets do the obvious and ask the > author. > > Dmitry, was the SUPPORTED_DEVICES added to allow an update from the > ar71xx image? > > Mathias Exactly. The idea was to allow updates. We are moving to ath79 and I don't think that this is nice to create problems in upgrade for users. When we are ready to release with ath79 images, we'll need to add the supported devices back. Now only those who can build images themselves are using, si I see no reason why don't we leave the easy upgrade path.
вс, 19 авг. 2018 г. в 14:29, Dmitry Tunin <hanipouspilot@gmail.com>: > > вс, 19 авг. 2018 г. в 12:28, Mathias Kresin <dev@kresin.me>: > > > > 18.08.2018 14:01, David Bauer: > > > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching > > > supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in > > > the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image > > > contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the > > > device-tree. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> > > > --- > > > target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > > index 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 > > > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > > DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 > > > DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport > > > TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 > > > - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 > > > + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 > > > endef > > > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > > > I was the opinion it's the ar71xx boardname and it's added to allow an > > update from the ar71xx image. But lets do the obvious and ask the > > author. > > > > Dmitry, was the SUPPORTED_DEVICES added to allow an update from the > > ar71xx image? > > > > Mathias > > Exactly. The idea was to allow updates. We are moving to ath79 and I > don't think that this is nice to create problems in upgrade for users. > When we are ready to release with ath79 images, we'll need to add the > supported devices back. > > Now only those who can build images themselves are using, si I see no > reason why don't we leave the easy upgrade path. But I was no the author of MR3020, I added MR3040.
I've just noticed that Image metadata isn't required on ar71xx so at least fot TP-LINK devices ar71xx accept factory firmware. Dmitry Tunin <hanipouspilot@gmail.com> 于2018年8月19日周日 下午7:34写道： > > вс, 19 авг. 2018 г. в 14:29, Dmitry Tunin <hanipouspilot@gmail.com>: > > > > вс, 19 авг. 2018 г. в 12:28, Mathias Kresin <dev@kresin.me>: > > > > > > 18.08.2018 14:01, David Bauer: > > > > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching > > > > supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in > > > > the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image > > > > contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the > > > > device-tree. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> > > > > --- > > > > target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > > > index 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 > > > > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > > > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > > > DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 > > > > DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport > > > > TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 > > > > - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 > > > > + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 > > > > endef > > > > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > > > > > I was the opinion it's the ar71xx boardname and it's added to allow an > > > update from the ar71xx image. But lets do the obvious and ask the > > > author. > > > > > > Dmitry, was the SUPPORTED_DEVICES added to allow an update from the > > > ar71xx image? > > > > > > Mathias > > > > Exactly. The idea was to allow updates. We are moving to ath79 and I > > don't think that this is nice to create problems in upgrade for users. > > When we are ready to release with ath79 images, we'll need to add the > > supported devices back. > > > > Now only those who can build images themselves are using, si I see no > > reason why don't we leave the easy upgrade path. > > But I was no the author of MR3020, I added MR3040. > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
2018-08-19 14:52 GMT+02:00 Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@gmail.com>: > I've just noticed that Image metadata isn't required on ar71xx so at > least fot TP-LINK devices ar71xx accept factory firmware. Yes it isn't required (enforced) for ar71xx. But if present, the metadata is validated. And all ath9 images should have image metadata. Mathias
diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk index 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 endef TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1
Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the device-tree. Signed-off-by: David Bauer <mail@david-bauer.net> --- target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)