Re: MTD patches

David Woodhouse
2004-08-17T09:15:44Z

On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 09:32 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I've had a couple of patches to MTD sitting in my 2.6 tree for a while
> now and wonder if you would consider including them.

Thanks for these.

> mtd-redboot-partition-fixes.patch
>
> This patch has two parts.
>
> The first is to factor out the offset to look at for the RedBoot
> partition table into a variable. This has no impact on the code
> as is, but makes it easier and clearer for platforms that have
> the partition table at some other offset to wrap a #ifdef
> CONFIG_ARCH_ around the variable rather than introducing errors
> by cloning the whole master->read call.

Hmmm. Isn't this why we introduced an extra argument to the partition
parsers in the first place? The map code should be able to pass a
suitable argument, rather than having ifdefs in the parser code? Gary?

> The second part looks for any partition name starting with
> "RedBoot" rather than looking for "RedBoot\0". On my platform
> RedBoot lives in a separate boot ROM, but the RedBoot config and
> partition table are in the main flash so we can find them.

Seems reasonable.

> mtd-add_full.patch
>
> This patch adds a new api call add_mtd_device_full() that allows
> a device to be added to a specific minor number (if it is
> available).

Hmm. I don't like this much -- if you want stable device naming that's
what udev is for. I don't want to accept this before the equivalent for
fixed numbering of SCSI or IDE drives is accepted upstream. :)

> mtd-jedec-probe-parts
>
> This patch adds a few new part numbers to jedec_probe.c. They
> are AMD AM29F002T, Hyundai HY29F002T and Macronix MX29FOO2T.

OK, please apply this -- you have CVS access don't you?

--
dwmw2