Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make Kernel A/B updates (as part of rootfs) default behavior for meta-rauc-raspberrypi #102

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 25, 2024

Conversation

AtanasBunchev
Copy link
Contributor

I have successfully done a kernel update using a RAUC update bundle on Raspberry Pi 5 with these patches and the instructions from the README.rst.

This is a necessary step for performing kernel A/B updates by storing
the kernel in the rootfs partition.

Signed-off-by: Atanas Bunchev <[email protected]>
@@ -41,6 +41,6 @@ else
reset
fi

fatload mmc 0:1 ${kernel_addr_r} @@KERNEL_IMAGETYPE@@
load ${BOOT_DEV} ${kernel_addr_R} boot/@@KERNEL_IMAGETYPE@@
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the change to kernel_addr_R made intentionally?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That was definitely a typo, thanks for catching it.

@leon-anavi leon-anavi self-requested a review June 23, 2024 15:16
Atanas Bunchev added 2 commits June 25, 2024 09:37
Updating the kernel as part of the rootfs partition will be the default behavior.

Signed-off-by: Atanas Bunchev <[email protected]>
@AtanasBunchev AtanasBunchev marked this pull request as draft June 25, 2024 06:51
Copy link
Member

@ejoerns ejoerns left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@AtanasBunchev Looks fine to me. I guess we don't need the 'Draft' status here?

@AtanasBunchev AtanasBunchev marked this pull request as ready for review June 25, 2024 09:07
@AtanasBunchev
Copy link
Contributor Author

I wanted to make sure to have tested it properly, so I used the 'Draft' status to make sure it doesn't get merged too early in case something doesn't work quite right.
Thanks again for the review :)

@ejoerns
Copy link
Member

ejoerns commented Jun 25, 2024

@leon-anavi Maybe a good chance before merging this: I recently enforced the merge policy to "rebase" for meta-rauc and other layers I maintain.
Do you (or anyone else) have an opinion on merge vs. rebase for this layer?
Normally, I'd argue for merges (as we do for rauc) since they give a clearer context and mark the source of the PR.
However, for other meta layers, the history is often linear and also here most PRs are single commits and patches are more or less independent from each other. Especially for maintaining different stable branches in parallel, I find linear history a bit more readable.

@leon-anavi
Copy link
Collaborator

@leon-anavi Maybe a good chance before merging this: I recently enforced the merge policy to "rebase" for meta-rauc and other layers I maintain. Do you (or anyone else) have an opinion on merge vs. rebase for this layer?

I don't have a hard opinion on this topic. Would you like to switch to "rebase" merge policy for meta-rauc-community?

@ejoerns
Copy link
Member

ejoerns commented Jun 25, 2024

@leon-anavi Maybe a good chance before merging this: I recently enforced the merge policy to "rebase" for meta-rauc and other layers I maintain. Do you (or anyone else) have an opinion on merge vs. rebase for this layer?

I don't have a hard opinion on this topic. Would you like to switch to "rebase" merge policy for meta-rauc-community?

Ok, let's give it a try. 👍

@ejoerns ejoerns merged commit 0a26c48 into rauc:master Jun 25, 2024
2 checks passed
@ejoerns ejoerns added the master label Jun 25, 2024
@leon-anavi
Copy link
Collaborator

@leon-anavi Maybe a good chance before merging this: I recently enforced the merge policy to "rebase" for meta-rauc and other layers I maintain. Do you (or anyone else) have an opinion on merge vs. rebase for this layer?

I don't have a hard opinion on this topic. Would you like to switch to "rebase" merge policy for meta-rauc-community?

Ok, let's give it a try. 👍

OK.

I don't have access to the "Settings" of this git repository anymore. Do you? Could you please enforce the default merge policy to "rebase" as for meta-rauc?

@ejoerns
Copy link
Member

ejoerns commented Jun 25, 2024

I don't have access to the "Settings" of this git repository anymore. Do you? Could you please enforce the default merge policy to "rebase" as for meta-rauc?

Should be done already 😉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants