Re: apex-1.3.31 and sercomm flash header
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 12:16:46PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Marc Singer <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2006-08-07 16:50]:
> > The kernel1 and kernel2 partitions will be non-overlapping. Kernel1
> > is the original 1M kernel partition.
> No, it wouldn't, because we also need the APEX partition,
Whoops! Your math skillz are *mad*.
> so kernel1 would be something like 896 KB. Speaking of which, do
> you think APEX will ever need more than 1 block (128 KB)?
Even with the NPE driver, I don't think so. Last I read, the kernel
driver was about 40K and I won't be doing even as much as that.
However, if you want to guarantee that there won't be any changes to
the partitioning, we should use 256K.
IMHO, it wouldn't be that big of a deal to allocate another block for
APEX if we find that the NPE driver takes that much space.
For clarity, the ethernet and related command code is about 8K. The
lh79524 core MAC driver is 5K and the smc91x driver is 10K. In other
words, ethernet is pretty cheap. I don't expect the current 40K
loader to swell beyond 128K.
> > As long as you are fine with this, I think we can make a go of it.
> > I like the fact that the kernel1 and kernel2 partitions are easily
> > usable from Linux/mtd.
> It sounds like a good idea to me.