AW: [PATCH v2 0/7] 22.03 lantiq: add support for x490 Fritzboxes

[Hauke Mehrtens]

Hi,

I am also fine if the user has to use image builder. This board is a bit 
special.
Maybe we should allow board specific initram fs root file systems in the 
future. This would also help in other cases where the user has to bot an 
initramfs system for initial flashing. We can do this later.

Hauke

On 10/25/22 08:50, kestrel1974 at t-online.de wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I can understand that it took a long time. The wasp loader kernel module v5 is the next in the review list of the remoteproc-linux kernel list.
> I will try to deal with Haukes suggestions by the end of the week. With regards to the packages, I think wpad is a left over from my tests and I can remove it and I will rework the kernel patches.
> But for the special packages that are not honored by the build bots, I do not really have a solution. For now I was thinking of instructions to use the image builder, which also means, that as a start there will not be any downloadable images that cover all possible functionality.
> 
> Daniel.
> 
> 
> -----Original-Nachricht-----
> Betreff: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] 22.03 lantiq: add support for x490 Fritzboxes
> Datum: 2022-10-25T00:24:57+0200
> Von: "Hauke Mehrtens" <hauke at hauke-m.de>
> An: "Torsten Duwe" <duwe at lst.de>, "openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org" <openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org>
> 
> On 10/23/22 13:19, Torsten Duwe wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here is my second attempt for initial FritzBox x490 support. 22.03 now
>> has all the necessary prerequisites, so support can be added according
>> to the rules.
>>
>> The original code snippets were submitted by John Crispin (IIRC),
>> Andreas Böhler and Daniel Kestrel. I carved out the changes I
>> considered necessary, integrated and tested them and cleaned them up
>> (hopefully ;)
>>
>> These are the minimal changes required to run the FB {3,7}490 as DSL
>> router (tested!). The 5490 is reported to be similar, so I included
>> it, but could not test it due to lack of hardware.
>>
>> The wireless on these boxes is offloaded to a secondary SoC which
>> needs to be provided its own OS. This feature is explicitly left out
>> here in order to go step by step. I kept some loose ends where they
>> don't hurt, for future reference.
>>
>> Changes from v1:
>> ----------------
>>
>> * return to squashfs for the rootfs; ubifs causes too much complexity
>>     esp. for updates, when even the same model can be equipped with
>>     varying flash chip geometries. UBI partitioning and volumes are kept
>>     though.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> How is this related to the pull request adding support for these devices
> on github?
> https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/5075
> 
> The pull request on github looks mostly ok to me, I just had some minor
> questions.
> 
> Hauke
> 
>