kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[Robert P. J. Day]

   i'm intrigued by the above kernel option.  currently, i define my
MTD partitions in drivers/mtd/maps/rpxlite.c, using structs map_info,
mtd_info, etc., and calling the appropriate routines, which works just
fine.

   will this kernel option actually let me define the basic MTD
partitions completely from the kernel command line without messing
with rpxlite.c?  or am i misreading the purpose of this option?

rday

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[Sylvain Munaut]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

 >
 > i'm intrigued by the above kernel option.  currently, i define my
 > MTD partitions in drivers/mtd/maps/rpxlite.c, using structs
 > map_info, mtd_info, etc., and calling the appropriate routines,
 > which works just fine.
 >
 > will this kernel option actually let me define the basic MTD
 > partitions completely from the kernel command line without messing
 > with rpxlite.c?  or am i misreading the purpose of this option?

I'd suggest having a look at the comment on top of

drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c

But I'm not sure if rpxlite.c . From what I see, it may require to add
a "probe" to look at the command line. Someone ?


Sylvain Munaut


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <40E164A6.8060502@246tNt.com> you wrote:
>
> I'd suggest having a look at the comment on top of
>
> drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
>
> But I'm not sure if rpxlite.c . From what I see, it may require to add
> a "probe" to look at the command line. Someone ?

It's tested and working in our version of the linuxppc_2_4_devel tree.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

--
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87  Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88  Email: wd@denx.de
"...all the  good  computer  designs  are  bootlegged;  the  formally
planned  products,  if  they  are built at all, are dogs!" - David E.
Lundstrom, "A Few Good Men From Univac", MIT Press, 1987

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> In message <40E164A6.8060502@246tNt.com> you wrote:
>>
>> I'd suggest having a look at the comment on top of
>>
>> drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
>>
>> But I'm not sure if rpxlite.c . From what I see, it may require to add
>> a "probe" to look at the command line. Someone ?
>
> It's tested and working in our version of the linuxppc_2_4_devel tree.

ok, that explains why i couldn't find it -- i'm working with the
linuxppc-2.5 bk tree.

rday

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 16:37 +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <40E164A6.8060502@246tNt.com> you wrote:
> >
> > I'd suggest having a look at the comment on top of
> >
> > drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> >
> > But I'm not sure if rpxlite.c . From what I see, it may require to add
> > a "probe" to look at the command line. Someone ?
>
> It's tested and working in our version of the linuxppc_2_4_devel tree.

Please could you commit this to my CVS tree. It'll make its way to Linus
in time -- I need to do an update of MTD code for Linus fairly soon for
other reasons.

--
dwmw2


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <Pine.LNX.4.60.0406290821150.19485@localhost.localdomain> you wrote:
>
>    i'm intrigued by the above kernel option.  currently, i define my
> MTD partitions in drivers/mtd/maps/rpxlite.c, using structs map_info,
> mtd_info, etc., and calling the appropriate routines, which works just
> fine.
>
>    will this kernel option actually let me define the basic MTD
> partitions completely from the kernel command line without messing
> with rpxlite.c?  or am i misreading the purpose of this option?

Yes, it will.

See http://www.denx.de/twiki/bin/view/DULG/BootTimeConfigurationOfMTDPartitions

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

--
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87  Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88  Email: wd@denx.de
Even if you aren't in doubt, consider the mental welfare of the  per-
son who has to maintain the code after you, and who will probably put
parens in the wrong place.          - Larry Wall in the perl man page

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> In message <Pine.LNX.4.60.0406290821150.19485@localhost.localdomain> you wrote:
>>
>>    i'm intrigued by the above kernel option.  currently, i define my
>> MTD partitions in drivers/mtd/maps/rpxlite.c, using structs map_info,
>> mtd_info, etc., and calling the appropriate routines, which works just
>> fine.
>>
>>    will this kernel option actually let me define the basic MTD
>> partitions completely from the kernel command line without messing
>> with rpxlite.c?  or am i misreading the purpose of this option?
>
> Yes, it will.
>
> See http://www.denx.de/twiki/bin/view/DULG/BootTimeConfigurationOfMTDPartitions

excellent, this just gets better and better.  however, will partition
definitions on the command line override those in rpxlite.c?  i notice
that the generic rpxlite.c that comes from the bk tree has a default
partition definition of fe000000/800000.  should that be removed
first?  or will it be ignored?  it's not clear from the comments in
the source.

rday

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: kernel option "Command line partition table parsing"

[Marius Groeger]

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> excellent, this just gets better and better.  however, will partition
> definitions on the command line override those in rpxlite.c?  i notice
> that the generic rpxlite.c that comes from the bk tree has a default
> partition definition of fe000000/800000.  should that be removed
> first?  or will it be ignored?  it's not clear from the comments in
> the source.

I don't think your version of rpxlite.c supports command line
partitioning at all. The official one doesn't. You should see the
existing mapping drivers such as physmap.c to learn how to add this,
it is not difficult.

The implementation should always give precedence to the command line
defininition.

Regards,
Marius

--
Marius Groeger <mgroeger@sysgo.com>           Project Manager
SYSGO AG                      Embedded and Real-Time Software
Voice: +49 6136 9948 0                  FAX: +49 6136 9948 10
www.sysgo.com | www.elinos.com | www.osek.de | www.imerva.com


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/