From: Mark Deneen <mdeneen@protonmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 20:27:07 +0000 (-0400)
Subject: additional notes on choosing between a static and a dynamic volume
X-Git-Url: https://www.infradead.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=6fa18a43a57a597efa20ab99eb3ec32fa3f5c877;p=mtd-www.git

additional notes on choosing between a static and a dynamic volume

Signed-off-by: David Oberhollenzer <david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at>
---

diff --git a/doc/ubi.xml b/doc/ubi.xml
index 568a66e..1290735 100644
--- a/doc/ubi.xml
+++ b/doc/ubi.xml
@@ -109,6 +109,13 @@ volumes. Static volumes are read-only and their contents are protected by
 upper layers (e.g., a file-system) are responsible for ensuring data
 integrity.</p>
 
+<p>Static volumes are typically used for the kernel, initramfs, and dtb.
+Larger static volumes may incur a significant penalty when opening, as the
+<code>CRC-32</code> needs to be calculated at this time. If you are looking
+to use static volumes for anything besides the kernel, initramfs, or dtb you
+are likely doing something wrong and would be better off using a dynamic volume
+instead.</p>
+
 <p>UBI is aware of bad eraseblocks (i.e. portions of flash which wear
 out over time) and frees upper-level software from having to handle bad
 eraseblocks itself. UBI has a pool of reserved physical eraseblocks, and