I've tried to use the state framework with an SPI eeprom as described here: https://www.barebox.org/doc/latest/user/state.html#eeprom The eeprom uses a "partition" for the state data: ------------------------8<--------------------------- eeprom@50 { partitions { compatible = "fixed-partitions"; #size-cells = <1>; #address-cells = <1>; backend_state_eeprom: eeprom_state_memory@400 { reg = <0x400 0x100>; label = "state-eeprom"; }; }; }; ------------------------>8--------------------------- It looks like there a 2 different concepts of having partitions in flashes: 1. As direct subnodes to the eeprom/flash 2. As subnodes within a "fixed-partition" subnode (as in the example above) >From linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partition.txt: "For backwards compatibility partitions as direct subnodes of the flash device are supported. This use is discouraged." So using the 2nd approach is right, isn't it? Trying to use this with the at25 nvmem driver in Linux, I get the following error: nvmem spi0.00: nvmem: invalid reg on /soc/aips-bus@2000000/spba-bus@2000000/ spi@2008000/fram@0/partitions Looking into nvmem_add_cells_from_of() in the linux sources, the NVMEM code seems to differ from the MTD core. It only expects the partitions as direct subnodes (without "fixed-partitions"). In Barebox, of_partition_fixup() can be configured using the global.of_partition_bindingof_partition_binding variable. But I couldn't find any user of this and this would probably affect both, NVMEM and MTD. >From the barebox point of view it seems best to add "fixed-partitions" support to Linux NVMEM. Any other suggests? regards Christian _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
