From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adnan Ali Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:45:33 +0000 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH RESEND] Introduced btrfs file-system with btrload command In-Reply-To: <20130328170424.GF5711@bill-the-cat> References: <1363874685-19647-1-git-send-email-adnan.ali@codethink.co.uk> <20130328170424.GF5711@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <515481BD.1010100@codethink.co.uk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 28/03/13 17:04, Tom Rini wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 02:04:45PM +0000, Adnan Ali wrote: > >> Introduces btrfs file-system to read file from >> volume/sub-volumes with btrload command. This >> implementation has read-only support. >> This btrfs implementation is based on syslinux btrfs >> code, commit 269ebc845ebc8b46ef4b0be7fa0005c7fdb95b8d. >> >> v9: patch problem reworked. >> v8: patch problem reworked. >> v5: merged with master. >> v4: btrls command added. >> >> Signed-off-by: Adnan Ali > First, this should be v10 not "RESEND". And that means the next version > should be v11. ok > > One of the rules of adding code to U-Boot is we don't add "dead" code > that's not built somewhere. So you should be adding CONFIG_CMD_BTR > somewhere like to say include/configs/sandbox.h (which has ext4/fat > support, but can't yet use them). You mean adding to one of the configs, I used include/configs/mx53loco the reason i didn't added config file to patch as some one told not to add config file as part of port. Is that what you mean. > > Another rule is no adding code with compiler warning. This code has > _a_lot_ of warnings. This is due in part to how you've ported the > syslinux generic inode/fs_info structure over to U-Boot (as we need to > spend some time here cleaning up our code, but I'm not asking you to do > that). I started digging into fixing these warnings but then found your Thanks if you are doing it. > changes to btrfs_read_super_block() where you removed the syslinux check > over all possible superblock areas. Why are we deviating here? Are > there other deviations from syslinux in the driver itself? Thanks. > The first super is the real one the rest of them are just mirrors of the first . If you want it to be added i can do it.