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

busybox: revert dd fsync change which makes no sense #1862

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 21, 2017
Merged

busybox: revert dd fsync change which makes no sense #1862

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 21, 2017

Conversation

MilhouseVH
Copy link
Contributor

@MilhouseVH MilhouseVH commented Aug 8, 2017

This change (introduced in 1.27.0) makes no sense - if anyone wanted to perform a single sync they would do that with dd && sync without changing the entire behaviour of conv=fsync.

Following this change in busybox, the upgrade progress indicators are useless as dd bs=1M conv=fsync no longer performs a sync every 1MB - there are now long delays where there is no progress, and then the progress jumps to 50% and finally 100% as the entire transfer is synced at the end (rather than at regular intervals during the transfer prior to busybox 1.27.0).

I've opened a bug: https://bugs.busybox.net/show_bug.cgi?id=10191

Apologies for not catching this sooner, I had assumed my SD card was on the fritz...!

@vpeter4
Copy link
Contributor

vpeter4 commented Aug 9, 2017

For a workaround you could make a loop around dd and wrote 1MB at a time :)

@MilhouseVH
Copy link
Contributor Author

MilhouseVH commented Aug 9, 2017

Yeah... that would be niiice! :)

Well, it looks like this won't be changing (see reply on bug) so I guess we'll simply continue to revert this change.

We could run sync every second in the monitoring thread but... meh. That's Plan B should reverting the change bite the dust (which is unlikely, as it's so trivial). Although if anyone prefers Plan B, please shout...

@lrusak lrusak merged commit 2800b21 into LibreELEC:master Aug 21, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants