On 10/8/24 3:10 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 at 22:22, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:11:40 +0200, Christian Marangi wrote: >>> this is an initial proposal to complete support for manually defining >>> partition table. >>> >>> Some background on this. Many OEM on embedded device (modem, router...) >>> are starting to migrate from NOR/NAND flash to eMMC. The reason for this >>> is that OEM are starting to require more and more space for the firmware >>> and price difference is becoming so little that using eMMC is only benefits >>> and no cons. >>> >>> [...] >> >> Applied, thanks! >> >> [1/6] block: add support for defining read-only partitions >> commit: 03cb793b26834ddca170ba87057c8f883772dd45 >> [2/6] docs: block: Document support for read-only partition in cmdline part >> commit: 62adb971e515d1bb0e9e555f3dd1d5dc948cf6a1 >> [3/6] block: introduce add_disk_fwnode() >> commit: e5f587242b6072ffab4f4a084a459a59f3035873 >> [4/6] mmc: block: attach partitions fwnode if found in mmc-card >> commit: 45ff6c340ddfc2dade74d5b7a8962c778ab7042c >> [5/6] block: add support for partition table defined in OF >> commit: 884555b557e5e6d41c866e2cd8d7b32f50ec974b >> [6/6] dt-bindings: mmc: Document support for partition table in mmc-card >> commit: 06f39701d0666d89dd3c86ff0b163c7139b7ba2d >> > > I think we may need another merging strategy for this as I quite big > changes in the pipe for the mmc block device this cycle. > > Would it be possible for you to drop the mmc patches and instead share > an immutable branch with the block changes that I can pull in, so I > can take the mmc changes? I mean we can, but the mmc changes in here are pretty self contained. I'd rather avoid rebasing the block tree for that, given how small the changes are. If it conflicts, should be easy enough to resolve. You an also just pull in the block tree now and resolve the conflict. There's not a whole lot in there yet outside of this series. -- Jens Axboe
