RE: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

RE: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Hans-Ulrich Schlieben]

Hi Enrico,

I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.

Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.
After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works. 
Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.

/mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now 
/mnt/mmc/boot... for system0 and
/mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1

Best regards

hu

-----Original Message-----
From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de> 
Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

Hi hu,

please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that may help here.

Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
> Hi Enrico,
> 
> thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " 
> kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
> that did the trick.
> 
> What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names for my 
> two alternate boot partitions.
> The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
> 
> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
> 
> whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
> 
> In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and 
> /mnt/mmc0.1/.
> 
> When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/ into 
> /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts the 
> first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.

Which version of barebox?

It should be sufficient to either say

  boot mmc0.0

or

  boot mmc0.1

and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.

> What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of 
> mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?

Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?


Best regards, Enrico

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Enrico Jörns                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pengutronix.de%2F&amp;data=01%7C01%7Chu.schlieben%40codewrights.de%7C6020bc01e00441d6349308d7b40726d7%7C0974af9b352b437cb606e9f242c0c227%7C0&amp;sdata=dcTydL6d89X3tBEeBaFlzMqJ6%2FpFkGrzNRQ6atkpLRk%3D&amp;reserved=0  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-5080 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Enrico Jörns]

Hi Hans,

Am 18.02.20 um 15:06 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
> Hi Enrico,
> 
> I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.

ah, I wasn't even aware that there is a website for this ;)

> Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.

Ok, good that we clarified this. The script should not be required in a
modern barebox as it has a lot of built-in automounting magic on board.

> After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works. 

This is the point that sounds a little strange, yes.

> Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.
> 
> /mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now 
> /mnt/mmc/boot... for system0 and
> /mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1

Would be great to see a log of such a failed mount to get a more
concrete idea what 'failed' actually means.

Best regards, Enrico

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de> 
> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle
> 
> Hi hu,
> 
> please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that may help here.
> 
> Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>> Hi Enrico,
>>
>> thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " 
>> kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
>> that did the trick.
>>
>> What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names for my 
>> two alternate boot partitions.
>> The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
>>
>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>
>> whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>
>> In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and 
>> /mnt/mmc0.1/.
>>
>> When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/ into 
>> /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts the 
>> first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.
> 
> Which version of barebox?
> 
> It should be sufficient to either say
> 
>   boot mmc0.0
> 
> or
> 
>   boot mmc0.1
> 
> and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.
> 
>> What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of 
>> mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?
> 
> Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?
> 
> 
> Best regards, Enrico
> 


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Enrico Jörns                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-5080 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

RE: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Hans-Ulrich Schlieben]

Hi Enrico,

the boot log looks like this:


barebox 2017.12.0 #1 Tue Feb 18 09:49:36 UTC 2020


Board: Phytec phyCORE-i.MX6 Quad with NAND
detected i.MX6 Quad revision 1.5
i.MX6 unique ID: ee803c540f2359d4
mdio_bus: miibus0: probed
eth0: got preset MAC address: 50:2d:f4:1b:af:b1
nand: ONFI flash detected
nand: NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xef, Chip ID: 0xd3 (Winbond W29N08GV), 1024MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64
Bad block table found at page 524224, version 0x01
Bad block table found at page 524160, version 0x01
m25p80 flash@00: n25q128a13 (16384 Kbytes)
imx-usb 2184200.usb: USB EHCI 1.00
imx-esdhc 2190000.usdhc: registered as 2190000.usdhc
da9063 da90620: da9062 with id 62.22.ff.1a detected
state: New state registered 'state'
state: Using bucket 0@0x00000000
netconsole: registered as netconsole-1
phySOM-i.MX6: Using environment in MMC
malloc space: 0x2fefb480 -> 0x4fdf68ff (size 511 MiB)
mmc0: detected SD card version 2.0
mmc0: registered mmc0
envfs: no envfs (magic mismatch) - envfs never written?
running /env/bin/init...

Hit m for menu or any other key to stop autoboot:    0
ext4 ext40: EXT2 rev 1, inode_size 256, descriptor size 64
testing for update
ubi0: scanning is finished
ubi0 error: ubi_read_volume_table: the layout volume was not found
ubi0 error: ubi_attach_mtd_dev: failed to attach mtd0, error -22
failed to attach: Invalid argument
booting 'bootchooser'
booting 'mmc0.0'
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
booting 'mmc0.0'
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
booting 'mmc0.0'
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
booting 'mmc0.1'


-> booting mmc0.1 works

So the problem is that barebox mounts /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc and not on /mnt/mmc0.0. But what configuration tells barebox to mount
/dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
and
/dev/mmc0.1 on /mnt/mmc0.1?

The configuration parameters are this: 
* bootchooser.system0.boot: mmc0.0
* bootchooser.system1.boot: mmc0.1
* bootchooser.targets: system0 system1

Best regards

hu


-----Original Message-----
From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de> 
Sent: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 17:28
To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
Cc: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

Hi Hans,

Am 18.02.20 um 15:06 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
> Hi Enrico,
> 
> I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.

ah, I wasn't even aware that there is a website for this ;)

> Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.

Ok, good that we clarified this. The script should not be required in a modern barebox as it has a lot of built-in automounting magic on board.

> After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works. 

This is the point that sounds a little strange, yes.

> Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.
> 
> /mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now /mnt/mmc/boot... for 
> system0 and /mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1

Would be great to see a log of such a failed mount to get a more concrete idea what 'failed' actually means.

Best regards, Enrico

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc 
> bundle
> 
> Hi hu,
> 
> please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that may help here.
> 
> Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>> Hi Enrico,
>>
>> thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " 
>> kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
>> that did the trick.
>>
>> What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names for 
>> my two alternate boot partitions.
>> The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
>>
>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>
>> whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>
>> In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and 
>> /mnt/mmc0.1/.
>>
>> When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/ into 
>> /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts the 
>> first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.
> 
> Which version of barebox?
> 
> It should be sufficient to either say
> 
>   boot mmc0.0
> 
> or
> 
>   boot mmc0.1
> 
> and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.
> 
>> What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of
>> mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?
> 
> Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?
> 
> 
> Best regards, Enrico
> 


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Enrico Jörns                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pengutronix.de%2F&amp;data=01%7C01%7Chu.schlieben%40codewrights.de%7C67aa3f20e3c64832ff6f08d7b558a807%7C0974af9b352b437cb606e9f242c0c227%7C0&amp;sdata=dm27yRdxtpEoje5owgkEN4OgBU8krnXavrMLoKYv2Bo%3D&amp;reserved=0  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-5080 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Stefan Riedmüller]

Hi Hans-Ulrich,

On 24.02.20 13:12, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
> Hi Enrico,
> 
> the boot log looks like this:
> 
> 
> barebox 2017.12.0 #1 Tue Feb 18 09:49:36 UTC 2020
> 
> 
> Board: Phytec phyCORE-i.MX6 Quad with NAND
> detected i.MX6 Quad revision 1.5
> i.MX6 unique ID: ee803c540f2359d4
> mdio_bus: miibus0: probed
> eth0: got preset MAC address: 50:2d:f4:1b:af:b1
> nand: ONFI flash detected
> nand: NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xef, Chip ID: 0xd3 (Winbond W29N08GV), 1024MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64
> Bad block table found at page 524224, version 0x01
> Bad block table found at page 524160, version 0x01
> m25p80 flash@00: n25q128a13 (16384 Kbytes)
> imx-usb 2184200.usb: USB EHCI 1.00
> imx-esdhc 2190000.usdhc: registered as 2190000.usdhc
> da9063 da90620: da9062 with id 62.22.ff.1a detected
> state: New state registered 'state'
> state: Using bucket 0@0x00000000
> netconsole: registered as netconsole-1
> phySOM-i.MX6: Using environment in MMC
> malloc space: 0x2fefb480 -> 0x4fdf68ff (size 511 MiB)
> mmc0: detected SD card version 2.0
> mmc0: registered mmc0
> envfs: no envfs (magic mismatch) - envfs never written?
> running /env/bin/init...
> 
> Hit m for menu or any other key to stop autoboot:    0
> ext4 ext40: EXT2 rev 1, inode_size 256, descriptor size 64
> testing for update
> ubi0: scanning is finished
> ubi0 error: ubi_read_volume_table: the layout volume was not found
> ubi0 error: ubi_attach_mtd_dev: failed to attach mtd0, error -22
> failed to attach: Invalid argument
> booting 'bootchooser'
> booting 'mmc0.0'
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
> booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
> booting 'mmc0.0'
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
> booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
> booting 'mmc0.0'
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
> booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory
> booting 'mmc0.1'
> 
> 
> -> booting mmc0.1 works
> 
> So the problem is that barebox mounts /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc and not on /mnt/mmc0.0. But what configuration tells barebox to mount
> /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> and
> /dev/mmc0.1 on /mnt/mmc0.1?

There is a /env/init/automount file installed on PHYTEC SOMs which comes 
from 
arch/arm/boards/phytec-som-imx6/defaultenv-physom-imx6-phycore/init/automount 
and triggers an automount from /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc.

I'm not sure if this conflicts with the internal automount on /mnt/mmc0.0 
but removing our automount script could be worth a try.

Stefan

> 
> The configuration parameters are this:
> * bootchooser.system0.boot: mmc0.0
> * bootchooser.system1.boot: mmc0.1
> * bootchooser.targets: system0 system1
> 
> Best regards
> 
> hu
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
> Sent: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 17:28
> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> Cc: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle
> 
> Hi Hans,
> 
> Am 18.02.20 um 15:06 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>> Hi Enrico,
>>
>> I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.
> 
> ah, I wasn't even aware that there is a website for this ;)
> 
>> Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.
> 
> Ok, good that we clarified this. The script should not be required in a modern barebox as it has a lot of built-in automounting magic on board.
> 
>> After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works.
> 
> This is the point that sounds a little strange, yes.
> 
>> Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.
>>
>> /mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now /mnt/mmc/boot... for
>> system0 and /mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1
> 
> Would be great to see a log of such a failed mount to get a more concrete idea what 'failed' actually means.
> 
> Best regards, Enrico
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
>> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>> Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc
>> bundle
>>
>> Hi hu,
>>
>> please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that may help here.
>>
>> Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>>> Hi Enrico,
>>>
>>> thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = "
>>> kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
>>> that did the trick.
>>>
>>> What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names for
>>> my two alternate boot partitions.
>>> The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
>>>
>>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
>>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
>>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>
>>> whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
>>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
>>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
>>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>
>>> In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and
>>> /mnt/mmc0.1/.
>>>
>>> When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/ into
>>> /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts the
>>> first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.
>>
>> Which version of barebox?
>>
>> It should be sufficient to either say
>>
>>    boot mmc0.0
>>
>> or
>>
>>    boot mmc0.1
>>
>> and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.
>>
>>> What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of
>>> mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?
>>
>> Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?
>>
>>
>> Best regards, Enrico
>>
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

RE: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Hans-Ulrich Schlieben]

Hi Stefan,

same result without the automount files. 
I'm not really shure whether I built barebox the intended way. What I did was to add RM_WORK_EXCLUDE += " barebox" to local.conf,
Rebuild barebox with bitbake -c cleansstate barebox, removed the three automount files below the imx6 folders and run 
bitbake -f -c compile barebox
and built the image. Did this disable the automount?

Best regards

hu




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Riedmüller <s.riedmueller@phytec.de> 
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 February 2020 16:16
> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> Cc: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>; yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle
> 
> Hi Hans-Ulrich,
> 
> On 24.02.20 13:12, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
> > Hi Enrico,
> > 
> > the boot log looks like this:
> > 
> > 
> > barebox 2017.12.0 #1 Tue Feb 18 09:49:36 UTC 2020
> > 
> > 
> > Board: Phytec phyCORE-i.MX6 Quad with NAND detected i.MX6 Quad 
> > revision 1.5
> > i.MX6 unique ID: ee803c540f2359d4
> > mdio_bus: miibus0: probed
> > eth0: got preset MAC address: 50:2d:f4:1b:af:b1
> > nand: ONFI flash detected
> > nand: NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xef, Chip ID: 0xd3 (Winbond 
> > W29N08GV), 1024MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64 Bad block table 
> > found at page 524224, version 0x01 Bad block table found at page 
> > 524160, version 0x01
> > m25p80 flash@00: n25q128a13 (16384 Kbytes) imx-usb 2184200.usb: USB 
> > EHCI 1.00 imx-esdhc 2190000.usdhc: registered as 2190000.usdhc
> > da9063 da90620: da9062 with id 62.22.ff.1a detected
> > state: New state registered 'state'
> > state: Using bucket 0@0x00000000
> > netconsole: registered as netconsole-1
> > phySOM-i.MX6: Using environment in MMC malloc space: 0x2fefb480 -> 
> > 0x4fdf68ff (size 511 MiB)
> > mmc0: detected SD card version 2.0
> > mmc0: registered mmc0
> > envfs: no envfs (magic mismatch) - envfs never written?
> > running /env/bin/init...
> > 
> > Hit m for menu or any other key to stop autoboot:    0
> > ext4 ext40: EXT2 rev 1, inode_size 256, descriptor size 64 testing for 
> > update
> > ubi0: scanning is finished
> > ubi0 error: ubi_read_volume_table: the layout volume was not found
> > ubi0 error: ubi_attach_mtd_dev: failed to attach mtd0, error -22 
> > failed to attach: Invalid argument booting 'bootchooser'
> > booting 'mmc0.0'
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory 
> > Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0' 
> > failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory 
> > Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0' 
> > failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory 
> > Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0' 
> > failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.1'
> > 
> > 
> > -> booting mmc0.1 works
> > 
> > So the problem is that barebox mounts /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc and not 
> > on /mnt/mmc0.0. But what configuration tells barebox to mount
> > /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> > and
> > /dev/mmc0.1 on /mnt/mmc0.1?
> 
> There is a /env/init/automount file installed on PHYTEC SOMs which comes from arch/arm/boards/phytec-som-imx6/defaultenv-physom-imx6-phycore/init/automount
> and triggers an automount from /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc.
> 
> I'm not sure if this conflicts with the internal automount on /mnt/mmc0.0 but removing our automount script could be worth a try.
> 
> Stefan
> 
> > 
> > The configuration parameters are this:
> > * bootchooser.system0.boot: mmc0.0
> > * bootchooser.system1.boot: mmc0.1
> > * bootchooser.targets: system0 system1
> > 
> > Best regards
> > 
> > hu
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
> > Sent: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 17:28
> > To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> > Cc: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; 
> > rauc@pengutronix.de
> > Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with 
> > a rauc bundle
> > 
> > Hi Hans,
> > 
> > Am 18.02.20 um 15:06 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
> >> Hi Enrico,
> >>
> >> I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.
> > 
> > ah, I wasn't even aware that there is a website for this ;)
> > 
> >> Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.
> > 
> > Ok, good that we clarified this. The script should not be required in a modern barebox as it has a lot of built-in automounting magic on board.
> > 
> >> After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works.
> > 
> > This is the point that sounds a little strange, yes.
> > 
> >> Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.
> >>
> >> /mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now /mnt/mmc/boot... for
> >> system0 and /mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1
> > 
> > Would be great to see a log of such a failed mount to get a more concrete idea what 'failed' actually means.
> > 
> > Best regards, Enrico
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
> >> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> >> Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a 
> >> rauc bundle
> >>
> >> Hi hu,
> >>
> >> please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that may > help here.
> >>
> >> Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
> >>> Hi Enrico,
> >>>
> >>> thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = "
> >>> kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
> >>> that did the trick.
> >>>
> >>> What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names for 
> >>> my two alternate boot partitions.
> >>> The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
> >>>
> >>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
> >>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
> >>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
> >>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
> >>>
> >>> whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
> >>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
> >>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
> >>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
> >>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
> >>>
> >>> In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and 
> >>> /mnt/mmc0.1/.
> >>>
> >>> When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/ into 
> >>> /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts the 
> >>> first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.
> >>
> >> Which version of barebox?
> >>
> >> It should be sufficient to either say
> >>
> >>    boot mmc0.0
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >>    boot mmc0.1
> >>
> >> and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.
> >>
> >>> What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of
> >>> mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?
> >>
> >> Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards, Enrico
> >>
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Stefan Riedmüller]

Hi Hans-Ulrich,

On 26.02.20 13:19, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
> 
> same result without the automount files. > I'm not really shure whether I built barebox the intended way. What I did 
was to add RM_WORK_EXCLUDE += " barebox" to local.conf,
> Rebuild barebox with bitbake -c cleansstate barebox, removed the three automount files below the imx6 folders and run
> bitbake -f -c compile barebox
> and built the image. Did this disable the automount?

Looks OK to me. Did you check the content of the automount file in the 
booted environment?

Stefan

> 
> Best regards
> 
> hu
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stefan Riedmüller <s.riedmueller@phytec.de>
>> Sent: Tuesday, 25 February 2020 16:16
>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>> Cc: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>; yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
>> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle
>>
>> Hi Hans-Ulrich,
>>
>> On 24.02.20 13:12, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
>>> Hi Enrico,
>>>
>>> the boot log looks like this:
>>>
>>>
>>> barebox 2017.12.0 #1 Tue Feb 18 09:49:36 UTC 2020
>>>
>>>
>>> Board: Phytec phyCORE-i.MX6 Quad with NAND detected i.MX6 Quad
>>> revision 1.5
>>> i.MX6 unique ID: ee803c540f2359d4
>>> mdio_bus: miibus0: probed
>>> eth0: got preset MAC address: 50:2d:f4:1b:af:b1
>>> nand: ONFI flash detected
>>> nand: NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xef, Chip ID: 0xd3 (Winbond
>>> W29N08GV), 1024MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64 Bad block table
>>> found at page 524224, version 0x01 Bad block table found at page
>>> 524160, version 0x01
>>> m25p80 flash@00: n25q128a13 (16384 Kbytes) imx-usb 2184200.usb: USB
>>> EHCI 1.00 imx-esdhc 2190000.usdhc: registered as 2190000.usdhc
>>> da9063 da90620: da9062 with id 62.22.ff.1a detected
>>> state: New state registered 'state'
>>> state: Using bucket 0@0x00000000
>>> netconsole: registered as netconsole-1
>>> phySOM-i.MX6: Using environment in MMC malloc space: 0x2fefb480 ->
>>> 0x4fdf68ff (size 511 MiB)
>>> mmc0: detected SD card version 2.0
>>> mmc0: registered mmc0
>>> envfs: no envfs (magic mismatch) - envfs never written?
>>> running /env/bin/init...
>>>
>>> Hit m for menu or any other key to stop autoboot:    0
>>> ext4 ext40: EXT2 rev 1, inode_size 256, descriptor size 64 testing for
>>> update
>>> ubi0: scanning is finished
>>> ubi0 error: ubi_read_volume_table: the layout volume was not found
>>> ubi0 error: ubi_attach_mtd_dev: failed to attach mtd0, error -22
>>> failed to attach: Invalid argument booting 'bootchooser'
>>> booting 'mmc0.0'
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
>>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
>>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
>>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.1'
>>>
>>>
>>> -> booting mmc0.1 works
>>>
>>> So the problem is that barebox mounts /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc and not
>>> on /mnt/mmc0.0. But what configuration tells barebox to mount
>>> /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>> and
>>> /dev/mmc0.1 on /mnt/mmc0.1?
>>
>> There is a /env/init/automount file installed on PHYTEC SOMs which comes from arch/arm/boards/phytec-som-imx6/defaultenv-physom-imx6-phycore/init/automount
>> and triggers an automount from /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc.
>>
>> I'm not sure if this conflicts with the internal automount on /mnt/mmc0.0 but removing our automount script could be worth a try.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>>
>>> The configuration parameters are this:
>>> * bootchooser.system0.boot: mmc0.0
>>> * bootchooser.system1.boot: mmc0.1
>>> * bootchooser.targets: system0 system1
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> hu
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 17:28
>>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>>> Cc: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org;
>>> rauc@pengutronix.de
>>> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with
>>> a rauc bundle
>>>
>>> Hi Hans,
>>>
>>> Am 18.02.20 um 15:06 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>>>> Hi Enrico,
>>>>
>>>> I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.
>>>
>>> ah, I wasn't even aware that there is a website for this ;)
>>>
>>>> Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.
>>>
>>> Ok, good that we clarified this. The script should not be required in a modern barebox as it has a lot of built-in automounting magic on board.
>>>
>>>> After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works.
>>>
>>> This is the point that sounds a little strange, yes.
>>>
>>>> Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.
>>>>
>>>> /mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now /mnt/mmc/boot... for
>>>> system0 and /mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1
>>>
>>> Would be great to see a log of such a failed mount to get a more concrete idea what 'failed' actually means.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Enrico
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
>>>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>>>> Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a
>>>> rauc bundle
>>>>
>>>> Hi hu,
>>>>
>>>> please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that may > help here.
>>>>
>>>> Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>>>>> Hi Enrico,
>>>>>
>>>>> thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = "
>>>>> kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
>>>>> that did the trick.
>>>>>
>>>>> What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names for
>>>>> my two alternate boot partitions.
>>>>> The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
>>>>>
>>>>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
>>>>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>>>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
>>>>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>>>
>>>>> whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
>>>>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
>>>>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>>>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
>>>>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>>>
>>>>> In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and
>>>>> /mnt/mmc0.1/.
>>>>>
>>>>> When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/ into
>>>>> /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts the
>>>>> first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.
>>>>
>>>> Which version of barebox?
>>>>
>>>> It should be sufficient to either say
>>>>
>>>>     boot mmc0.0
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>>     boot mmc0.1
>>>>
>>>> and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.
>>>>
>>>>> What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of
>>>>> mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?
>>>>
>>>> Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Enrico
>>>>

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

RE: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Hans-Ulrich Schlieben]

Hi Stefan,

thank you for your help.

automount changed from formerly 

/mnt/eeprom0.update-eeprom mount eeprom0.update-eeprom
/mnt/mmc0            mount mmc0
/mnt/mmc0.0          mount mmc0.0
/mnt/mmc0.1          mount mmc0.1
/mnt/mmc0.2          mount mmc0.2
/mnt/mmc0.3          mount mmc0.3
/mnt/mmc0.barebox    mount mmc0.barebox
/mnt/mmc0.barebox-environment mount mmc0.barebox-environment
/mnt/tftp            ifup eth0 && mount -t tftp $eth0.serverip /mnt/tftp
/mnt/mmc             mmc0.probe=1 && [ -e /dev/mmc0.0 ] && mount /dev/mmc0.0 /mnt/mmc
/mnt/emmc            mmc3.probe=1 && [ -e /dev/mmc3.0 ] && mount /dev/mmc3.0 /mnt/emmc
/mnt/ratp            mount -t ratpfs none /mnt/ratp

to 

/mnt/eeprom0.update-eeprom mount eeprom0.update-eeprom
/mnt/mmc0            mount mmc0
/mnt/mmc0.0          mount mmc0.0
/mnt/mmc0.1          mount mmc0.1
/mnt/mmc0.2          mount mmc0.2
/mnt/mmc0.3          mount mmc0.3
/mnt/mmc0.barebox    mount mmc0.barebox
/mnt/mmc0.barebox-environment mount mmc0.barebox-environment
/mnt/tftp            ifup eth0 && mount -t tftp $eth0.serverip /mnt/tftp
/mnt/mmc             mmc2.probe=1 && [ -e /dev/mmc2.0 ] && mount /dev/mmc2.0 /mnt/mmc
/mnt/ratp            mount -t ratpfs none /mnt/ratp

so my removing of automount worked changed something. I had to remove the other automount file too to get here

/mnt/eeprom0.update-eeprom mount eeprom0.update-eeprom
/mnt/mmc0            mount mmc0
/mnt/mmc0.0          mount mmc0.0
/mnt/mmc0.1          mount mmc0.1
/mnt/mmc0.2          mount mmc0.2
/mnt/mmc0.3          mount mmc0.3
/mnt/mmc0.barebox    mount mmc0.barebox
/mnt/mmc0.barebox-environment mount mmc0.barebox-environment
/mnt/tftp            ifup eth0 && mount -t tftp $eth0.serverip /mnt/tftp
/mnt/nfs             ifup eth0 && mount -t nfs ${eth0.serverip}:/home/${global.user}/nfsroot/${global.hostname} /mnt/nfs
/mnt/ratp            mount -t ratpfs none /mnt/ratp

But the result was the same. Same log output as before, three failing boot attempts on mmc0.0 and then booting from mmc0.1. 

(I'm not shure whether i remember right that I had a config where the boot to mmc0.0 
from the image worked and the rauc update only failed to boot from mmc0.0.
Now directly the image fails too.)

Even if this failed to help just for my understanding, how could I remove / override these automount files in a recipe?

Thank you and best regards

hu


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Riedmüller <s.riedmueller@phytec.de> 
> Sent: Wednesday, 26 February 2020 14:24
> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> Cc: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>; yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle
> 
> Hi Hans-Ulrich,
> 
> On 26.02.20 13:19, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
> > Hi Stefan,
> > 
> > same result without the automount files. > I'm not really shure 
> > whether I built barebox the intended way. What I did
> was to add RM_WORK_EXCLUDE += " barebox" to local.conf,
> > Rebuild barebox with bitbake -c cleansstate barebox, removed the three 
> > automount files below the imx6 folders and run bitbake -f -c compile 
> > barebox and built the image. Did this disable the automount?
> 
> Looks OK to me. Did you check the content of the automount file in the booted environment?
> 
> Stefan
> 
> > 
> > Best regards
> > 
> > hu
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Stefan Riedmüller <s.riedmueller@phytec.de>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 25 February 2020 16:16
> >> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> >> Cc: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>; yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; 
> >> barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
> >> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel 
> >> with a rauc bundle
> >>
> >> Hi Hans-Ulrich,
> >>
> >> On 24.02.20 13:12, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
> >>> Hi Enrico,
> >>>
> >>> the boot log looks like this:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> barebox 2017.12.0 #1 Tue Feb 18 09:49:36 UTC 2020
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Board: Phytec phyCORE-i.MX6 Quad with NAND detected i.MX6 Quad 
> >>> revision 1.5
> >>> i.MX6 unique ID: ee803c540f2359d4
> >>> mdio_bus: miibus0: probed
> >>> eth0: got preset MAC address: 50:2d:f4:1b:af:b1
> >>> nand: ONFI flash detected
> >>> nand: NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xef, Chip ID: 0xd3 (Winbond 
> >>> W29N08GV), 1024MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64 Bad block table 
> >>> found at page 524224, version 0x01 Bad block table found at page 
> >>> 524160, version 0x01
> >>> m25p80 flash@00: n25q128a13 (16384 Kbytes) imx-usb 2184200.usb: USB 
> >>> EHCI 1.00 imx-esdhc 2190000.usdhc: registered as 2190000.usdhc
> >>> da9063 da90620: da9062 with id 62.22.ff.1a detected
> >>> state: New state registered 'state'
> >>> state: Using bucket 0@0x00000000
> >>> netconsole: registered as netconsole-1
> >>> phySOM-i.MX6: Using environment in MMC malloc space: 0x2fefb480 -> 
> >>> 0x4fdf68ff (size 511 MiB)
> >>> mmc0: detected SD card version 2.0
> >>> mmc0: registered mmc0
> >>> envfs: no envfs (magic mismatch) - envfs never written?
> >>> running /env/bin/init...
> >>>
> >>> Hit m for menu or any other key to stop autoboot:    0
> >>> ext4 ext40: EXT2 rev 1, inode_size 256, descriptor size 64 testing 
> >>> for update
> >>> ubi0: scanning is finished
> >>> ubi0 error: ubi_read_volume_table: the layout volume was not found
> >>> ubi0 error: ubi_attach_mtd_dev: failed to attach mtd0, error -22 
> >>> failed to attach: Invalid argument booting 'bootchooser'
> >>> booting 'mmc0.0'
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory 
> >>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
> >>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory 
> >>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
> >>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory 
> >>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
> >>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.1'
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -> booting mmc0.1 works
> >>>
> >>> So the problem is that barebox mounts /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc and 
> >>> not on /mnt/mmc0.0. But what configuration tells barebox to mount
> >>> /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
> >>> and
> >>> /dev/mmc0.1 on /mnt/mmc0.1?
> >>
> >> There is a /env/init/automount file installed on PHYTEC SOMs which 
> >> comes from 
> >> arch/arm/boards/phytec-som-imx6/defaultenv-physom-imx6-phycore/init/a
> >> utomount and triggers an automount from /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure if this conflicts with the internal automount on /mnt/mmc0.0 but removing our automount script could be worth a try.
> >>
> >> Stefan
> >>
> >>>
> >>> The configuration parameters are this:
> >>> * bootchooser.system0.boot: mmc0.0
> >>> * bootchooser.system1.boot: mmc0.1
> >>> * bootchooser.targets: system0 system1
> >>>
> >>> Best regards
> >>>
> >>> hu
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 17:28
> >>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> >>> Cc: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; 
> >>> rauc@pengutronix.de
> >>> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel 
> >>> with a rauc bundle
> >>>
> >>> Hi Hans,
> >>>
> >>> Am 18.02.20 um 15:06 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
> >>>> Hi Enrico,
> >>>>
> >>>> I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.
> >>>
> >>> ah, I wasn't even aware that there is a website for this ;)
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.
> >>>
> >>> Ok, good that we clarified this. The script should not be required in a modern barebox as it has a lot of built-in automounting magic on board.
> >>>
> >>>> After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works.
> >>>
> >>> This is the point that sounds a little strange, yes.
> >>>
> >>>> Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.
> >>>>
> >>>> /mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now /mnt/mmc/boot... for
> >>>> system0 and /mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1
> >>>
> >>> Would be great to see a log of such a failed mount to get a more concrete idea what 'failed' actually means.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards, Enrico
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
> >>>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
> >>>> Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a 
> >>>> rauc bundle
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi hu,
> >>>>
> >>>> please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that > may > help here.> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>>>>> > Hi Enrico,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = "
>>>>> > kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
>>>>> > that did the trick.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names 
>>>>> > for my two alternate boot partitions.
>>>>> > The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
>>>>> > global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>>>> > global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
>>>>> > rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
>>>>> > global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
>>>>> > global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>>>> > global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
>>>>> > rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and 
>>>>> > /mnt/mmc0.1/.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/ 
>>>>> > into /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts 
>>>>> > the first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Which version of barebox?
>>>>> 
>>>>>  It should be sufficient to either say
>>>>> 
>>>>>      boot mmc0.0
>>>>> 
>>>>>  or
>>>>> 
>>>>>      boot mmc0.1
>>>>> 
>>>>>  and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.
>>>>> 
>>>>> > What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of
>>>>> > mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Best regards, Enrico
>>>>>
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle

[Stefan Riedmüller]

Hi Hans-Ulrich,

On 26.02.20 17:03, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
> 
> thank you for your help.
> 
> automount changed from formerly
> 
> /mnt/eeprom0.update-eeprom mount eeprom0.update-eeprom
> /mnt/mmc0            mount mmc0
> /mnt/mmc0.0          mount mmc0.0
> /mnt/mmc0.1          mount mmc0.1
> /mnt/mmc0.2          mount mmc0.2
> /mnt/mmc0.3          mount mmc0.3
> /mnt/mmc0.barebox    mount mmc0.barebox
> /mnt/mmc0.barebox-environment mount mmc0.barebox-environment
> /mnt/tftp            ifup eth0 && mount -t tftp $eth0.serverip /mnt/tftp
> /mnt/mmc             mmc0.probe=1 && [ -e /dev/mmc0.0 ] && mount /dev/mmc0.0 /mnt/mmc
> /mnt/emmc            mmc3.probe=1 && [ -e /dev/mmc3.0 ] && mount /dev/mmc3.0 /mnt/emmc
> /mnt/ratp            mount -t ratpfs none /mnt/ratp
> 
> to
> 
> /mnt/eeprom0.update-eeprom mount eeprom0.update-eeprom
> /mnt/mmc0            mount mmc0
> /mnt/mmc0.0          mount mmc0.0
> /mnt/mmc0.1          mount mmc0.1
> /mnt/mmc0.2          mount mmc0.2
> /mnt/mmc0.3          mount mmc0.3
> /mnt/mmc0.barebox    mount mmc0.barebox
> /mnt/mmc0.barebox-environment mount mmc0.barebox-environment
> /mnt/tftp            ifup eth0 && mount -t tftp $eth0.serverip /mnt/tftp
> /mnt/mmc             mmc2.probe=1 && [ -e /dev/mmc2.0 ] && mount /dev/mmc2.0 /mnt/mmc
> /mnt/ratp            mount -t ratpfs none /mnt/ratp
> 
> so my removing of automount worked changed something. I had to remove the other automount file too to get here
> 
> /mnt/eeprom0.update-eeprom mount eeprom0.update-eeprom
> /mnt/mmc0            mount mmc0
> /mnt/mmc0.0          mount mmc0.0
> /mnt/mmc0.1          mount mmc0.1
> /mnt/mmc0.2          mount mmc0.2
> /mnt/mmc0.3          mount mmc0.3
> /mnt/mmc0.barebox    mount mmc0.barebox
> /mnt/mmc0.barebox-environment mount mmc0.barebox-environment
> /mnt/tftp            ifup eth0 && mount -t tftp $eth0.serverip /mnt/tftp
> /mnt/nfs             ifup eth0 && mount -t nfs ${eth0.serverip}:/home/${global.user}/nfsroot/${global.hostname} /mnt/nfs
> /mnt/ratp            mount -t ratpfs none /mnt/ratp
> 
> But the result was the same. Same log output as before, three failing boot attempts on mmc0.0 and then booting from mmc0.1.
> 
> (I'm not shure whether i remember right that I had a config where the boot to mmc0.0
> from the image worked and the rauc update only failed to boot from mmc0.0.
> Now directly the image fails too.)
> 
> Even if this failed to help just for my understanding, how could I remove / override these automount files in a recipe?

You can create a patch from your changes in the barebox which remove/modify 
the automount file and add it to the barebox recipes SRC_URI in an append 
file. See 
https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/latest/kernel-dev/kernel-dev.html#applying-patches

Best regards,
Stefan

> 
> Thank you and best regards
> 
> hu
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stefan Riedmüller <s.riedmueller@phytec.de>
>> Sent: Wednesday, 26 February 2020 14:24
>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>> Cc: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>; yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
>> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a rauc bundle
>>
>> Hi Hans-Ulrich,
>>
>> On 26.02.20 13:19, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
>>> Hi Stefan,
>>>
>>> same result without the automount files. > I'm not really shure
>>> whether I built barebox the intended way. What I did
>> was to add RM_WORK_EXCLUDE += " barebox" to local.conf,
>>> Rebuild barebox with bitbake -c cleansstate barebox, removed the three
>>> automount files below the imx6 folders and run bitbake -f -c compile
>>> barebox and built the image. Did this disable the automount?
>>
>> Looks OK to me. Did you check the content of the automount file in the booted environment?
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> hu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Stefan Riedmüller <s.riedmueller@phytec.de>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 25 February 2020 16:16
>>>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>>>> Cc: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>; yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org;
>>>> barebox@lists.infradead.org; rauc@pengutronix.de
>>>> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel
>>>> with a rauc bundle
>>>>
>>>> Hi Hans-Ulrich,
>>>>
>>>> On 24.02.20 13:12, Hans-Ulrich Schlieben wrote:
>>>>> Hi Enrico,
>>>>>
>>>>> the boot log looks like this:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> barebox 2017.12.0 #1 Tue Feb 18 09:49:36 UTC 2020
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Board: Phytec phyCORE-i.MX6 Quad with NAND detected i.MX6 Quad
>>>>> revision 1.5
>>>>> i.MX6 unique ID: ee803c540f2359d4
>>>>> mdio_bus: miibus0: probed
>>>>> eth0: got preset MAC address: 50:2d:f4:1b:af:b1
>>>>> nand: ONFI flash detected
>>>>> nand: NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xef, Chip ID: 0xd3 (Winbond
>>>>> W29N08GV), 1024MiB, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64 Bad block table
>>>>> found at page 524224, version 0x01 Bad block table found at page
>>>>> 524160, version 0x01
>>>>> m25p80 flash@00: n25q128a13 (16384 Kbytes) imx-usb 2184200.usb: USB
>>>>> EHCI 1.00 imx-esdhc 2190000.usdhc: registered as 2190000.usdhc
>>>>> da9063 da90620: da9062 with id 62.22.ff.1a detected
>>>>> state: New state registered 'state'
>>>>> state: Using bucket 0@0x00000000
>>>>> netconsole: registered as netconsole-1
>>>>> phySOM-i.MX6: Using environment in MMC malloc space: 0x2fefb480 ->
>>>>> 0x4fdf68ff (size 511 MiB)
>>>>> mmc0: detected SD card version 2.0
>>>>> mmc0: registered mmc0
>>>>> envfs: no envfs (magic mismatch) - envfs never written?
>>>>> running /env/bin/init...
>>>>>
>>>>> Hit m for menu or any other key to stop autoboot:    0
>>>>> ext4 ext40: EXT2 rev 1, inode_size 256, descriptor size 64 testing
>>>>> for update
>>>>> ubi0: scanning is finished
>>>>> ubi0 error: ubi_read_volume_table: the layout volume was not found
>>>>> ubi0 error: ubi_attach_mtd_dev: failed to attach mtd0, error -22
>>>>> failed to attach: Invalid argument booting 'bootchooser'
>>>>> booting 'mmc0.0'
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
>>>>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>>>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
>>>>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>>>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> mounted /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> could not open /mnt/mmc0.0/boot/zImage: No such file or directory
>>>>> Booting 'mmc0.0' failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.0'
>>>>> failed: No such file or directory booting 'mmc0.1'
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -> booting mmc0.1 works
>>>>>
>>>>> So the problem is that barebox mounts /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc and
>>>>> not on /mnt/mmc0.0. But what configuration tells barebox to mount
>>>>> /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc
>>>>> and
>>>>> /dev/mmc0.1 on /mnt/mmc0.1?
>>>>
>>>> There is a /env/init/automount file installed on PHYTEC SOMs which
>>>> comes from
>>>> arch/arm/boards/phytec-som-imx6/defaultenv-physom-imx6-phycore/init/a
>>>> utomount and triggers an automount from /dev/mmc0.0 on /mnt/mmc.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure if this conflicts with the internal automount on /mnt/mmc0.0 but removing our automount script could be worth a try.
>>>>
>>>> Stefan
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The configuration parameters are this:
>>>>> * bootchooser.system0.boot: mmc0.0
>>>>> * bootchooser.system1.boot: mmc0.1
>>>>> * bootchooser.targets: system0 system1
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>
>>>>> hu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 17:28
>>>>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>>>>> Cc: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; barebox@lists.infradead.org;
>>>>> rauc@pengutronix.de
>>>>> Subject: Re: [RAUC] Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel
>>>>> with a rauc bundle
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Hans,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 18.02.20 um 15:06 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>>>>>> Hi Enrico,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just answered your first mail on the website and thought that will automatically reply to all. Added all lists now, hope these are correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> ah, I wasn't even aware that there is a website for this ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks to you I found the custom automount in the providers recipes. This mounts /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, good that we clarified this. The script should not be required in a modern barebox as it has a lot of built-in automounting magic on board.
>>>>>
>>>>>> After the mount it seems that only when I install a new image the barebox mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 works.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the point that sounds a little strange, yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rauc / barebox seems something to change after a bundle update whereas mount /dev/mmc0.0 to /mnt/mmc0.0 fails and the files are only visible in /mnt/mmc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /mnt/mmc works in both cases so I have now /mnt/mmc/boot... for
>>>>>> system0 and /mnt/mmc0.1/boot... for system1
>>>>>
>>>>> Would be great to see a log of such a failed mount to get a more concrete idea what 'failed' actually means.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards, Enrico
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2020 01:12
>>>>>> To: Hans-Ulrich Schlieben <hu.schlieben@codewrights.de>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Private: Re: [yocto] #yocto update the kernel with a
>>>>>> rauc bundle
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi hu,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> please keep at least any list in CC so that others can benefit from this discussion, too (Both RAUC and barebox ML would fit here). It also increases the range and thus potential people that > may > help here.>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Am 17.02.20 um 13:58 schrieb Hans-Ulrich Schlieben:
>>>>>>> Hi Enrico,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thank you very much for your help with IMAGE_INSTALL_append = "
>>>>>>> kernel-image kernel-devicetree"
>>>>>>> that did the trick.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What i do not understand is how barebox handles the mount names
>>>>>>> for my two alternate boot partitions.
>>>>>>> The boot on the first partition works only under /mnt/mmc/:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc/boot/zImage"
>>>>>>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>>>>>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p1
>>>>>>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> whereas the second works with /mnt/mmc1/:
>>>>>>> global.bootm.image="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/zImage"
>>>>>>> global.bootm.oftree="/mnt/mmc0.1/boot/imx6q-phytec-ksp0663.dtb"
>>>>>>> global.linux.bootargs.dyn.root="root=/dev/mmcblk0p2
>>>>>>> rootflags='data=journal' wd=60 ipv6.disable=1"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In barebox i see both root filesystems under /mnt/mmc0.0 and
>>>>>>> /mnt/mmc0.1/.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When i try to have a symmetrical configuration and rename /mmc/
>>>>>>> into /mmc0.0/ boot on mmc0.0 does not work because it still mounts
>>>>>>> the first partition ar /mnt/mmc/.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Which version of barebox?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   It should be sufficient to either say
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       boot mmc0.0
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       boot mmc0.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   and barebox will automatically mount the partition, look for a bootspec file under /loader/entries and assemble the required boot options and kernel command line automatically.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What tells barebox to mount during boot mmc and mmc0.1 instead of
>>>>>>> mmc0.0 and mmc0.1?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Is there any custom automount unit located in you built-in env probably?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Best regards, Enrico
>>>>>>

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox