Re: [PATCH 1/1] mtd/intel-spi: Support cmdline-based partition

[ron minnich <rminnich@xxxxxxxxx>]

yeah, I agree with you, and am wrapping up the patch to support the :

thanks for your comments!

ron

On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:41 AM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi ron,
>
> ron minnich <rminnich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on Mon, 30 Mar 2020 08:53:22
> -0700:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 12:27 AM Miquel Raynal
> > <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Would it be hard to support an extra ':' after the MTD device name?
> > > This way would would allow anything inside the optional '(' ')' but
> > > would keep the trailing ':'.
> > >
> > > toTay:
> > >         mtdparts=name:part1,part2
> > >
> > > So:
> > >         mtdparts=(0000:00:1f.5):25165824(BIOS),-(squashfs)
> >
> >
> > I thought about that ':' too. It does add a bit more to the code, and
> > a bit more in the way of error cases. I always worry, when code is
> > going into flash,
> > about errors where something looks close to right but is wrong. (says
> > the person who just typed it instead of is a few times :-)
> >
> > What if we did this:
> > mtdparts=[0000:00:1f.5]25165824(BIOS),-(squashfs)
> >
> > Is the "]" 'enough different' that we do not need the ':'?
> >
> > I kind of like the [] better anyway as it makes the mtdid stand out a
> > bit more from the part names? But is it enough that we don't need the
> > ':'? Would you still prefer the () as opposed to the []?
>
> I like the [] as well, maybe more than () because at least it does not
> conflict with the partition names. But I really prefer keeping the : if
> the code is still readable.
>
> It is much easier to explain to people : "if you have a : in the name,
> enclose it with []".
>
> Thanks,
> Miquèl

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/