From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr0-x233.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c0c::233]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.87 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1dIWcO-0007iT-Eg for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 08:47:10 +0000 Received: by mail-wr0-x233.google.com with SMTP id g76so2914904wrd.1 for ; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 01:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 10:46:42 +0200 From: Pali =?utf-8?B?Um9ow6Fy?= To: Richard Weinberger Cc: David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , Boris Brezillon , Marek Vasut , Artem Bityutskiy , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mtd: block2mtd: Add support for specifying MTD write size and subpage shift Message-ID: <20170607084642.GG4690@pali> References: <1496418222-23483-1-git-send-email-pali.rohar@gmail.com> <1496418222-23483-3-git-send-email-pali.rohar@gmail.com> <20170605112145.GE14675@pali> <20170605112508.GF14675@pali> <79f3b92f-5be4-8d46-985d-0b38cffd6032@nod.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <79f3b92f-5be4-8d46-985d-0b38cffd6032@nod.at> List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Monday 05 June 2017 13:27:18 Richard Weinberger wrote: > Pali, > > Am 05.06.2017 um 13:25 schrieb Pali Rohár: > > On Monday 05 June 2017 13:23:22 Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> Pali, > >> > >> Am 05.06.2017 um 13:21 schrieb Pali Rohár: > >>> On Friday 02 June 2017 18:13:02 Richard Weinberger wrote: > >>>> Pali, > >>>> > >>>> Am 02.06.2017 um 17:43 schrieb Pali Rohár: > >>>>> It is needed for creating emulated devices suitable for using in UBI layer > >>>>> and with UBIFS. > >>>> > >>>> Why? > >>> > >>> ubifs depends on write size of nand. And without those parameters as > >>> specified in cover letter I'm unable to mount N900 rootfs image exported > >>> via block2mtd. ubifs reject such image. > >> > >> Hmm, so you render block2mtd into a semi-NAND chip? :) > > > > Probably you can call it like that. But it is still MTD device... > > This is what I meant in my other mail. > You add NAND specific properties but still denote it as MTD_RAM/ROM. > I'm not sure whether this is a good idea. Ok, lets wait what other people think. At least patches like fallback or check should be less problematic and could be applied separately. -- Pali Rohár pali.rohar@gmail.com