From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gRDVs-0004RM-6T for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 09:49:09 +0000 Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 10:48:56 +0100 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20181126094856.7nlcoikiolt7eqpy@pengutronix.de> References: <1542744481.4097.40.camel@erwinrol.com> <20181121081813.biacokuvrvpx7ktd@pengutronix.de> <1543058064.5085.4.camel@erwinrol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1543058064.5085.4.camel@erwinrol.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: powerfail safe env save To: Erwin Rol Cc: Barebox List On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 12:14:24PM +0100, Erwin Rol wrote: > Hallo Sascha, > > On Wed, 2018-11-21 at 09:18 +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > Hi Erwin, > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 09:08:01PM +0100, Erwin Rol wrote: > > > Hallo, > > > > > > as long time u-boot user I have several projects where we have a dual > > > dataflash "sector" in wich we store our env variables. And dual so we > > > always have or the correct old version or the correct new version even > > > if there is a power fail during saveenv. > > > > > > Is powerfail robust env writing also available in barebox. Or what > > > would be the barebox equifelant of a number of config variables? > > > > We do not have redundant environment right now. > > > > There have been attempts in the past, but they fell short in flexibility > > and/or robustness. Nowadays we normally do not use environment in > > products anymore, so this isn't much of an issue. > > So what do you use? Some sort of configuration (mac addresses, serial > numbers, etc.) will still be needed, or ? > > > > > If you have flash I would consider using UBI for the environment. With > > atomic LEB change a robust environment could be implemented fairly > > easily. > > It is a phycore imx6 module with NAND, so that should be possible. But > I rather stay as close by "mainline" as possible, so I would rather use > what ever feature Barebox hhas to offer out of the box. > > What I have in U-boot is that we have 2 kernels (and rootfs) and after > an update I write in the uboot env which kernel/rootfs is active. This > is something that happens in the field and so the writing to the uboot > env must be so robuste that the system will not be bricked. > > What would be the equivalent of such a setup in Barebox ? We use the state frameowork and bootchooser for this task, see: https://barebox.org/doc/latest/user/state.html https://www.barebox.org/doc/latest/devicetree/bindings/barebox/barebox,state.html https://barebox.org/doc/latest/user/bootchooser.html?highlight=bootchooser Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox