Re: [PATCH 1/5] ubi: introduce ubi->bad_peb_limit

Shmulik Ladkani
2012-07-19T06:16:00Z

On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:40:53 +0300 Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've also amended the Kconfig text a tiny bit and dropped the defconfig
> changes - let's have them separately as a single patch at the end of the
> series.

Wouldn't having the defconfig change as the last patch break things for
those defconfigs that had explicitly set CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE
other than the default?

Meaning, if the one-before-last would be "kill CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE",
then those defconfigs that had _explicitly_ set a BEB_RESERVE value,
which do not YET set a BEB_LIMIT value, will have their BEB_LIMIT as
the default - but they actually meant a specific value other than the
default.

This is why I tried to:
- set the CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_LIMIT in defconfigs as part of the commit
which introduces this config (copy same value as their RESERVE config)
- kill all CONFIG_MTD_UBI_BEB_RESERVE references from defconfigs as part
of the commit which kills it

Regards,
Shmulik