Does anyone tftpboot the userspace image?

[Brad Bishop]

Hi Xo

Honestly this is my _only_ use case… I don’t ever flash machines unless
whatever I am testing specifically requires that, which for me anyway,
is very infrequent.

There doesn’t necessarily have to be an all or nothing approach taken here.

cpio.lzma.u-boot can be removed from IMAGE_FSTYPES in several places:

-in your local.conf
-in zaius.conf in the zaius layer
-in a yet to be created ingrasys.conf in the ingrasys layer
-probably other ways too

Alternatively, we can turn it off by default and add it where it is desired - possibly
-in my local.conf
-in in ibm.conf

I guess what I am not sure of is which makes more sense to be the default?
When these kinds of questions come up I tend to think in terms of what would
benefit new users of the project the most?  I honestly don’t know - what does
everyone else think?

-brad


> On Jan 20, 2017, at 8:59 PM, Xo Wang <xow at google.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> I noticed from this discussion
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/2016-April/thread.html#2738
> that kernel developers were tftpbooting the userspace image from a
> obmc-phosphor-image-<machine>.cpio.lzma.u-boot file.
> 
> 1. How does/did that work? I guess you needed a custom init in the
> initrd to load the u-boot container (?) instead of from mtd?
> 
> 2. Are you still using this? Building the extra .cpio.lzma.u-boot is
> kind of slow, with an extra ~45 seconds to do 'find | cpio | lzma;
> mkimage' every build, and it can't be parallelized.
> 
> I ask because I mailed a change to remove those image products from
> the build, then followed the 'blame' to this use case:
> https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/#/c/1957/
> 
> cheers
> xo
> _______________________________________________
> openbmc mailing list
> openbmc at lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/openbmc