Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:25:25 -0300
From:      "Dr. Rolf Jansen" <freebsd-rj@cyclaero.com>
To:        Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>
Cc:        freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Partition layout of ARM SD card images
Message-ID:  <CBE9BE5E-3201-4636-B12A-6DFCD8414DDA@cyclaero.com>
In-Reply-To: <598CB7EE-BFF9-4E8F-89CE-B51F3D1B4338@yahoo.com>
References:  <1F42EED0-B39F-4E33-986A-FB70A3AA4362@cyclaero.com> <FA446115-E78D-42C9-B5B0-21EF88075FC1@yahoo.com> <45EC1E40-0615-4473-846F-8E9B5202FCC4@cyclaero.com> <598CB7EE-BFF9-4E8F-89CE-B51F3D1B4338@yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Am 10.07.2022 um 18:44 schrieb Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>:
>=20
> On 2022-Jul-10, at 14:02, Dr. Rolf Jansen <freebsd-rj@cyclaero.com> =
wrote:
>=20
>> Well, I thought the arm64-RPi one is a general purpose layout becase =
the armv7 one is identical:
>=20
> So far as I'm aware, the RPi*'s are unique in having all the
> content in a file system instead of having some content outside
> any file system. This tends to make them generally unusual in
> various respects as far a Small Board Computers go.
>=20
> It is also why I can normally add a RPi* dual-boot configuration
> adjustment to a configuration for another Small Board Computer
> (such as the Rock64): no conflict is generated by the 2 U-Boots
> or other such.
>=20
>> mdconfig -a -u 0 -t vnode -f =
diskimg/FreeBSD-13.1-RELEASE-arm-armv7-GENERICSD.img
>> gpart show md0 md0s2
>>=20
>>  =3D>     63  6291393  md0  MBR  (3.0G)
>>         63     2016       - free -  (1.0M)
>>       2079   102312    1  fat32lba  [active]  (50M)
>>     104391  6187041    2  freebsd  (3.0G)
>>    6291432       24       - free -  (12K)
>>=20
>>  =3D>      0  6187041  md0s2  BSD  (3.0G)
>>          0       57         - free -  (29K)
>>         57  6186880      1  freebsd-ufs  (2.9G)
>>    6186937      104         - free -  (52K)
>>=20
>> Must be something historical.
>=20
> Just for reference for 32-bit (hard float) raspios:
>=20
> =
https://downloads.raspberrypi.org/raspios_lite_armhf/images/raspios_lite_a=
rmhf-2022-04-07/2022-04-04-raspios-bullseye-armhf-lite.img.xz
>=20
> # mdconfig -a -u 2 -t vnode -f =
2022-04-04-raspios-bullseye-armhf-lite.img=20
> # gpart show md2
> =3D>     63  3940289  md2  MBR  (1.9G)
>       63     8129       - free -  (4.0M)
>     8192   524288    1  fat32lba  (256M)
>   532480  3407872    2  linux-data  (1.6G)
>=20
> So the same use of 8192 and 256M these days for 32-bit
> raspios.

2079 and 8192 are starting blocks of the fat32 partition, and 2079 vs. =
8192 is the difference between non-aligned and aligned. My concern is =
not the size but whether the partitions are aligned.

BTW, I use FreeBSD-13.1-RELEASE-arm-armv7-GENERICSD.img for the =
BeagleBone Black's and for these I also changed the partitions so the =
fat32 becomes 4k aligned.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CBE9BE5E-3201-4636-B12A-6DFCD8414DDA>