Re: [PATCH v6 0/6] block: partition table OF support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 10/8/24 8:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 at 15:24, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
> 
> Okay, let's give it a try and see how it goes.
> 
>>
>> 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.
> 
> Let's wait and see. If we get some conflicts, you can always set a tag
> to the latest of the mmc commits in your tree that I can pull instead.

Yep, sounds like plan!

-- 
Jens Axboe




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux