what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition? - page 2 - General Help and Assistance on using CHDK stable releases - CHDK Forum supplierdeeply
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down

what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?

  • 40 Replies
  • 4585 Views
*

Offline Mlapse

  • ****
  • 453
  • S95 S110
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #10 on: 05 / May / 2019, 16:39:04 »
Advertisements
if you mean to select a script, yes i can. it started with no script selected.
« Last Edit: 05 / May / 2019, 16:41:20 by Mlapse »
Logged
frustration is a key ingredient in progress
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 13673
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #11 on: 05 / May / 2019, 16:50:25 »
Quote from: Mlapse on 05 / May / 2019, 16:39:04
if you mean to select a script, yes i can. it started with no script selected.
I meant "Miscellaneous -> file browser" but script selection is the same thing.

This suggests there is some kind of timing/initialization error, because the file select module (CHDK/MODULES/FSELECT.FLT) is the one used for the modules check. CHDK checks once at startup whether it can access this file, as a sanity check for a correct install. If not, it shows the message.

Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline srsa_4c

  • ******
  • 4447
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #12 on: 05 / May / 2019, 16:50:57 »
Quote from: Mlapse on 05 / May / 2019, 13:41:03
It's my S95
Can you try another, older camera (for example a490 if you still have it)?
Logged
*

Offline Mlapse

  • ****
  • 453
  • S95 S110
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #13 on: 05 / May / 2019, 16:58:27 »
same with the a490,
error:missing modules
and no script loaded, should be, but i can load it and run it, take and see pictures.
Logged
frustration is a key ingredient in progress
*

Offline srsa_4c

  • ******
  • 4447
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #14 on: 05 / May / 2019, 18:48:11 »
Quote from: Mlapse on 05 / May / 2019, 16:58:27
same with the a490,
error:missing modules
and no script loaded, should be, but i can load it and run it, take and see pictures.
Looks like the firmware spends too much time initializing the file system. CHDK only waits up to 4 seconds for this to complete.
Logged
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 13673
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #15 on: 06 / May / 2019, 00:27:55 »
@Mlapse:
What Canon firmware does your s95 have?

edit:
Here's patch that reports startup time in the misc values area. It displays 3 values
T0: tick when spytask got to the start of the spytask_can_start wait
FS: when core_spytask_can_start() was called, when we think the filesystem is ready
ST: when spytask exited the can_start wait. Normally 10ms after the previous item

It seems surprising to me that an empty 256 GB FAT32 card would take > 4s to be ready, but I don't have one to try. Elph130 with a 32 GB card takes about 700ms, while elph180 with an 8 GB card takes ~200.

Another possibility is that our filesystem ready logic is failing somehow (so core_spytask_can_start is called before it actually should), although that failing based on card size would also surprise me.
« Last Edit: 06 / May / 2019, 01:37:57 by reyalp »
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline Mlapse

  • ****
  • 453
  • S95 S110
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #16 on: 06 / May / 2019, 02:19:44 »
when the card is formatted in FAT32 it takes noticeably more time than when formatted exFAT for the cam to be ready (orange led flashing at start).

it looks like 4-6 seconds...I will test the patch this afternoon, where should I place it, what to do with it?
the card is rated class10, U3, V30, 4K, A1 (up to: read:95MB/s, write:55MB/s, 1500 iops) so it should exceed whatever the S95 can use

i am testing it on a S95-100K, but have several versions lying around to crossreference results.
« Last Edit: 06 / May / 2019, 03:03:21 by Mlapse »
Logged
frustration is a key ingredient in progress
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 13673
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #17 on: 06 / May / 2019, 03:01:22 »
Quote from: Mlapse on 06 / May / 2019, 02:19:44
it looks like 4-6 seconds...I will test the patch this afternoon, where should I place it?
the card is rated class10, U3, v30, 4K, A1 (up to: read:95MB/s, write:55MB/s, 1500 iops)
That's useful information.
Quote
i am testing it on a S95-100K, but have several versions lying around to crossreference results.
Here's a test build with the patch applied for S95 100k. You can just unzip the files on the root of the card.

Please post the 3 numbers described in the previous post.
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline Mlapse

  • ****
  • 453
  • S95 S110
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #18 on: 06 / May / 2019, 03:08:28 »
here are the results.

256GB/FAT32
t0:60
fs:5510
st:4170
so st comes in early

256GB/exFAT
t0:60
fs:860
st:860
fs=st

16gb class10/FAT32 for reference
t0:60
fs:650
st:660

my first conclusion is that rebooting with a cam that only support FAT16 or FAT32 card lock method is possible by increasing wait time.
but not really viable for 256GB or larger sd cards, because of that extra time needed....not only the 5sec. start is something to consider.
in my experience startup before buttons work (BUSY) also takes more time if pictures are present on the card...if that time should be included in total reboot time it will easy go over 5 minutes.

however a longer wait at boot might still have extra value if you prefer the autoboot to the firmware update method.
« Last Edit: 06 / May / 2019, 07:53:26 by Mlapse »
Logged
frustration is a key ingredient in progress
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 13673
Re: what tool to use to create a large fat32 partition?
« Reply #19 on: 06 / May / 2019, 12:26:35 »
Thanks. That appears to confirm that it's just the Canon firmware taking a long time to be ready with large FAT32 cards. I wonder if this would be influence by cluster size or something, I would guess the time is reading/checking some FAT related structures.

I believe the current 4 second timeout is just what someone figured was longer than a properly functioning port should take, so there shouldn't be any particular issue increasing it.

Attached is a build with it set to 10s. Let me know if it resolves the problem. I'll check it in if it works and doesn't create any new problems.
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
« previous next »
 

Related Topics