Looks like BS is trying to reduce firmware size

Post new topic   Reply to topic    DD-WRT Forum Forum Index -> Marvell MVEBU based Hardware (WRT1900AC etc.)
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
DaveI
DD-WRT User


Joined: 06 Jul 2009
Posts: 242

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 20:42    Post subject: Looks like BS is trying to reduce firmware size Reply with quote
All of us non 3200 and 32x users will look forward to this in the next build (fingers crossed).

https://svn.dd-wrt.com/changeset/40442

_________________
WRT1900ACSv2
Sponsor
d0ug
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 31 Jul 2015
Posts: 758

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 21:13    Post subject: Reply with quote
Unfortunately I don't think a slimming down by 200KB is going to help us much, Looking back on the last firmware builds that successfully flash both partitions we are looking at somewhere in the 37.4MB ballpark being the max size the firmware can be. The most current build released today clocks in at 38.6MB, so we need a trim down of nearly a MB now. I suspect if this is not reigned in we are very close now to bumping up against the size limit of the larger partition now.

Looking at some other builds, like the broadcom mega builds that I use on an old WRT54GS ftp://ftp.dd-wrt.com/betas/2019/07-26-2019-r40439/broadcom/ which provides nearly the same functionality as the builds for the WRT AC series router but clocks in at only 7.3MB, it begs the question. What is all the extra bloat in the WRT AC series firmware?

Hell even comparing some of the builds for the WRT AC routers from a year or two ago where they were clocking in at around the 29-30MB point for exactly the same functionality. So what is this extra nearly 10MB of bloat that the firmware has taken on lately?
DaveI
DD-WRT User


Joined: 06 Jul 2009
Posts: 242

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 21:59    Post subject: Reply with quote
Last firmware that flashed successfully for me on both partitions was r40134 which had a filesize of 38404KB for the webflash (38400KB for factory)...
You are right that from current firmware that's about 1MB less...I know when I saw ZFS being used that is a resource hog compared to BTRFS and that was something that it looks like he was trying to improve on today...

As others pointed out as well there is some stuff that can be eliminated like the built-in speedtest which I doubt many actually use...Then someone mentioned something about tethering that may not even function anymore...

Someone said the new kernel is bigger and accounts for some of the increase...But I would bet that if BS got rid of some of the old stuff that may not even work anymore that it could be downsized enough but when you start removing a bunch of stuff it may start breaking other stuff so it might not be that straight forward...

_________________
WRT1900ACSv2
ttowling
DD-WRT User


Joined: 01 Mar 2019
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 22:12    Post subject: Reply with quote
DaveI wrote:
Last firmware that flashed successfully for me on both partitions was r40134 which had a filesize of 38404KB for the webflash (38400KB for factory)...
You are right that from current firmware that's about 1MB less...I know when I saw ZFS being used that is a resource hog compared to BTRFS and that was something that it looks like he was trying to improve on today...

As others pointed out as well there is some stuff that can be eliminated like the built-in speedtest which I doubt many actually use...Then someone mentioned something about tethering that may not even function anymore...

Someone said the new kernel is bigger and accounts for some of the increase...But I would bet that if BS got rid of some of the old stuff that may not even work anymore that it could be downsized enough but when you start removing a bunch of stuff it may start breaking other stuff so it might not be that straight forward...


You mean the speed test that sponsor dd-wrt ? I'm all for this project being sustainable, but it's a bit counterproductive if all the boat means I can't flash the firmware.
Ah-Pin-Kor
DD-WRT User


Joined: 19 Sep 2015
Posts: 264

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 22:27    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've been keeping records of the size of the wrt1900acsv2 webflash (actually wrt1x00 series have same sizes).
Last flashable build to partition 2 is 40167.
Recent couple of builds have gotten even larger.
We need to shave off 1MB to get back to the 37.63MB of 40167.

Code:

40134 - ok        - 37.5MB   39325696
40167 - ok        - 37.63MB  39456768
40189 - not ok    - 37.88MB  39718912
40260 - not ok    -          39718912
40276 - not ok    -          39718912
40352 - not ok    -          39718912
40400 - not ok    - 38.63MB  40505344
40439 - not ok    -          40505344

_________________

Netgear R7800 kongpro 19.07 20190914 || Netgear R7000 36070M kongac (Client Bridge=5GHz, AP=2.4GHz with bridged VAP)
Linksys WRT32X davidc502 OpenWrt || Linksys WRT1200ACv1 Gargoyle 1.11.x
Linksys WRT1900ACSv2 dd-wrt 39956
DaveI
DD-WRT User


Joined: 06 Jul 2009
Posts: 242

PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 22:32    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yeah...I kind of figured when he put that in the firmware a while back that he was getting some kind of compensation (Which I fully support as well).
And I wonder about all that old HOTSPOT STUFF..
Does anybody really use that...Here in the U.S. if your ISP found out you were doing that HOTSPOT stuff on your bandwidth they'd kick you off...Maybe it's useful in the underdeveloped nations for bandwidth sharing but I can't imagine anybody in the U.S. or Europe (At least Western Europe) doing that without risking getting kicked off their ISP.


ttowling wrote:


You mean the speed test that sponsor dd-wrt ? I'm all for this project being sustainable, but it's a bit counterproductive if all the boat means I can't flash the firmware.

_________________
WRT1900ACSv2
d0ug
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 31 Jul 2015
Posts: 758

PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 0:34    Post subject: Reply with quote
DaveI wrote:
Yeah...I kind of figured when he put that in the firmware a while back that he was getting some kind of compensation (Which I fully support as well).
And I wonder about all that old HOTSPOT STUFF..
Does anybody really use that...Here in the U.S. if your ISP found out you were doing that HOTSPOT stuff on your bandwidth they'd kick you off...Maybe it's useful in the underdeveloped nations for bandwidth sharing but I can't imagine anybody in the U.S. or Europe (At least Western Europe) doing that without risking getting kicked off their ISP.


My guess it is more for someone who might use DDWRT in their business, on a business class connection that would allow such sharing. Think cafe, bar, coffee shop. But I do wonder how many people actually use it?
ttowling
DD-WRT User


Joined: 01 Mar 2019
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:26    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm pretty sure businesses like cafes use a standard connection to provide free WiFi to customers all the time, but 99.9% of them don't have any kind of meaningful user restrictions or QoS.
The only place you have to give identification is places like shopping centres etc.
The bottom line is - if it won't flash, nobody will use it.
dyilmaz
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2019 13:38    Post subject: Firmware image size is still the same Reply with quote
Firmware image size is still the same on r40501...
ttowling
DD-WRT User


Joined: 01 Mar 2019
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2019 14:21    Post subject: Re: Firmware image size is still the same Reply with quote
dyilmaz wrote:
Firmware image size is still the same on r40501...


I think all you need to do is type 'ubootenv set boot_part 1' in the command box before flashing? I just upgraded to the latest build, but I was on partition 2 so flashed via Web.. my comments about the bloat are still relevant. I don't want to have to use one partition repeatedly.
ellick
DD-WRT User


Joined: 28 Mar 2016
Posts: 100

PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2019 15:14    Post subject: Reply with quote
Since the r40009 firmware, I've seen the GUI get much, much slower until I lose access to it completely on my WRTACS v1.

Others have reported this as well in the new build threads The router is working and I don't lose internet and I can access the router via putty. I just lose access to the web GUI from multiple browsers and machines until I reboot it.

Could this slowdown/GUI loss be attributed to this file size bloat?
kernel-panic69
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 08 May 2018
Posts: 1895
Location: Texas, USA

PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2019 15:54    Post subject: Reply with quote
The commit in the OP was to help fix the problem that was bricking Broadcom ARM, if I am not completely losing my mind. I honestly do not follow the Marvell-specific configs and commits, but this is something that needs to be addressed directly, if it hasn't already.
Monza
DD-WRT User


Joined: 01 Jul 2018
Posts: 81

PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2019 17:13    Post subject: Re: Firmware image size is still the same Reply with quote
ttowling wrote:

I think all you need to do is type 'ubootenv set boot_part 1' in the command box before flashing? I just upgraded to the latest build, but I was on partition 2 so flashed via Web.. my comments about the bloat are still relevant. I don't want to have to use one partition repeatedly.


I believe mrjcd confirmed in the r40443 thread and my experience confirms it as well that you would run the "ubootenv set boot_part 2" command prior to update.

If I understand correctly the command doesn't change partitions but simply overwrites the current partition data the router "thinks" it's on to partition 2 so when you update it automatically writes to the opposite partition which is partition 1 after running the "ubootenv set boot_part 2" command.

I use the "ubootenv set boot_part 2" before every update now as I'm always on partition 1 with these new releases. It seems to do what mrjcd suggested. Please correct me if that info was wrong. =)
d0ug
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 31 Jul 2015
Posts: 758

PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2019 18:42    Post subject: Reply with quote
I am guessing the way it works, the write command which is what flashes the firmware looks at that uboot boot_part variable to see what is currently set as the bootable partition. It then writes the firmware to the partition that is not currently bootable then flips the uboot boot_part variable to the partition it just wrote the firmware so that on next reboot uboot will load the new firmware.

AFAIK uboot does not remain running in the background to do any kind of trickery in redirecting where the data gets written. uboot is merely a bootloader that drops out of memory after the linux kernel takes over.
dyilmaz
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:08    Post subject: Reply with quote
I agree with you. I have a ACS V2 and I'm having the same issues on recent firmwares. If I click an option on web interface, it becomes unresponsive and I have to switch my router off and on. I think dd-wrt have some code inefficiencies nowadays. It would be a very good job if they removed useless codes.


ellick wrote:
Since the r40009 firmware, I've seen the GUI get much, much slower until I lose access to it completely on my WRTACS v1.

Others have reported this as well in the new build threads The router is working and I don't lose internet and I can access the router via putty. I just lose access to the web GUI from multiple browsers and machines until I reboot it.

Could this slowdown/GUI loss be attributed to this file size bloat?
Goto page 1, 2  Next Display posts from previous:    Page 1 of 2
Post new topic   Reply to topic    DD-WRT Forum Forum Index -> Marvell MVEBU based Hardware (WRT1900AC etc.) All times are GMT

Navigation

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum