lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 4/5] mtd_blkdevs: add option to enable scanning for partitions
On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 03:48:04PM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> daniel@makrotopia.org wrote on Thu, 12 May 2022 20:39:27 +0100:
>
> > Add Kconfig boolean CONFIG_MTD_BLOCK_PARTITIONS and enable block
> > partition parsers on non-NAND mtdblock devices in case it is selected.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@makrotopia.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/mtd/Kconfig | 11 +++++++++++
> > drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c | 4 +++-
> > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/Kconfig b/drivers/mtd/Kconfig
> > index 796a2eccbef0b8..12874dec15692a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/Kconfig
> > @@ -69,6 +69,17 @@ config MTD_BLOCK_RO
> > You do not need this option for use with the DiskOnChip devices. For
> > those, enable NFTL support (CONFIG_NFTL) instead.
> >
> > +config MTD_BLOCK_PARTITIONS
> > + bool "Scan for partitions on MTD block devices"
> > + depends on MTD_BLOCK || MTD_BLOCK_RO
> > + default y if FIT_PARTITION
> > + help
> > + Scan MTD block devices for partitions (ie. MBR, GPT, uImage.FIT, ...).
> > + (NAND devices are omitted, ubiblock should be used instead when)
> > +
> > + Unless your MTD partitions contain sub-partitions mapped using a
> > + partition table, say no.
> > +
> > comment "Note that in some cases UBI block is preferred. See MTD_UBI_BLOCK."
> > depends on MTD_BLOCK || MTD_BLOCK_RO
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> > index f7317211146550..c67ce2e6fbeb0a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> > @@ -359,7 +359,9 @@ int add_mtd_blktrans_dev(struct mtd_blktrans_dev *new)
> > } else {
> > snprintf(gd->disk_name, sizeof(gd->disk_name),
> > "%s%d", tr->name, new->devnum);
> > - gd->flags |= GENHD_FL_NO_PART;
> > +
> > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MTD_BLOCK_PARTITIONS) || mtd_type_is_nand(new->mtd))
> > + gd->flags |= GENHD_FL_NO_PART;
>
> I really wonder if we need this in mtdblock ? Isn't ubiblock enough?

One of the ideas behind this series is to be able to use the exact same
image (which includes a rootfs filesystem sub-image) on devices with
different boot storage options instead of having to write kernel and
root filesystems separately in a storage-type specific manner.

So the very same uImage.FIT on devices with block-based storage can be
written into a GPT partition (see 3/5), on devices with NAND flash
where UBI is used into a UBI volume (see 5/5) and on devices with NOR
flash into an MTD partition (this patch).

>
> Anyhow,
> Acked-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>

Thank you for the review!


>
> I'll let Richard ack the ubiblock patch.
>
> Thanks,
> Miquèl
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Linux MTD discussion mailing list
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-07 02:43    [W:0.159 / U:4.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site