| Message ID | 3608830.1HcjCr2GE9@tool |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [OpenWrt-Devel,1/4] bcm63xx: kernel: add BCM63167 cpuid variant | expand |
Ok, I assume it’s safe to drop this, since the bootloader is on a separate partition and all Sercomm devices seem to have both bootloaders available from factory. > El 4 jun 2020, a las 0:48, Daniel González Cabanelas <dgcbueu@gmail.com> escribió: > > There is no need to include the CFE bootloader in the Sercomm factory > images. > > There might be a case when this could be useful: > - We are running the stock firmware on the first Sercomm image > - The second partition storing the botloader was erased (unlikely) > Even in this case flashing an image without a bootlader is harmless. > > Don't include the bootloader in the factory image creation and rid of the > risk of flashing factory images with an untested bootloader partition. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel González Cabanelas <dgcbueu@gmail.com> > --- > target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile | 12 ------------ > 1 file changed, 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile b/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile > index eb4b78b06a..e57b99391f 100644 > --- a/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile > +++ b/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile > @@ -242,20 +242,8 @@ define Build/cfe-sercomm-part > --part-name rootfs_lib \ > --part-version $(SERCOMM_VERSION) > > - rm -rf $@-bootloader > - mkdir -p $@-bootloader > - cp $(KDIR)/bcm63xx-cfe/$(CFE_RAM_FILE) $@-bootloader/$(CFE_RAM_JFFS2_NAME) > - $(call Build/cfe-jffs2,$@-bootloader) > - $(call Build/pad-to,$(BLOCKSIZE)) > - $(TOPDIR)/scripts/sercomm-partition-tag.py \ > - --input-file $@ \ > - --output-file $@.bootloader \ > - --part-name bootloader \ > - --part-version $(SERCOMM_VERSION) > - > mv $@.kernel_rootfs $@ > dd if=$@.rootfs_lib >> $@ > - dd if=$@.bootloader >> $@ > endef > > define Build/cfe-sercomm-load > -- > 2.27.0 > > > >
diff --git a/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile b/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile index eb4b78b06a..e57b99391f 100644 --- a/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile +++ b/target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile @@ -242,20 +242,8 @@ define Build/cfe-sercomm-part --part-name rootfs_lib \ --part-version $(SERCOMM_VERSION) - rm -rf $@-bootloader - mkdir -p $@-bootloader - cp $(KDIR)/bcm63xx-cfe/$(CFE_RAM_FILE) $@-bootloader/$(CFE_RAM_JFFS2_NAME) - $(call Build/cfe-jffs2,$@-bootloader) - $(call Build/pad-to,$(BLOCKSIZE)) - $(TOPDIR)/scripts/sercomm-partition-tag.py \ - --input-file $@ \ - --output-file $@.bootloader \ - --part-name bootloader \ - --part-version $(SERCOMM_VERSION) - mv $@.kernel_rootfs $@ dd if=$@.rootfs_lib >> $@ - dd if=$@.bootloader >> $@ endef define Build/cfe-sercomm-load
There is no need to include the CFE bootloader in the Sercomm factory images. There might be a case when this could be useful: - We are running the stock firmware on the first Sercomm image - The second partition storing the botloader was erased (unlikely) Even in this case flashing an image without a bootlader is harmless. Don't include the bootloader in the factory image creation and rid of the risk of flashing factory images with an untested bootloader partition. Signed-off-by: Daniel González Cabanelas <dgcbueu@gmail.com> --- target/linux/bcm63xx/image/Makefile | 12 ------------ 1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)