Re: [PATCH 1/2] ubi: mount partitions specified in device tree

[Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>]

Am 19.06.2016 um 17:24 schrieb Daniel Golle:
>> You mean marking a MTD partition in DT and UBI will attach from it?
>> That makes sense.
> 
> Yes. Currently we just use a naming convention (the first MTD partition
> named 'ubi' will be auto-attached), that's obviously not very clean...

I was about to reply to my own mail that you can still attach by name.
Boris reminded me of that, I forgot that feature.^^
Why is it not clean?

>>
>> To sum up, I asked a lot of questions to understand your use case(s).
>> Everything you described can be done with existing facilities.
>> But I agree that at least some UBI DT machinery would be nice to have
>> although we need to check with DT folks first.
>> At least marking an MTD partition should be fine, hopefully.
> 
> Great. That'd already greatly improve things.

How is that better than attach by name? You mark the to be attached
MTD by its name...

> I can see that sooner or later we will need some way to reference UBI
> volumes in DT, independently of the whole rootfs selection. Vendors do
> use UBI volumes also for things like WiFi EEPROM data. Currentlhy, we
> extract that in user-space and save a copy in /lib/firmware/... for
> things more crazy than plain offsets inside MTD partitions.

Really, please append a decent root= kernel parameter.

Thanks,
//richard