From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [85.21.88.2] (helo=mail.dev.rtsoft.ru) by canuck.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.62 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Gm8zh-0004sH-3X for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 20 Nov 2006 08:15:33 -0500 Message-ID: <4561AB83.3070001@dev.rtsoft.ru> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:20:03 +0300 From: Konstantin Baydarov MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dedekind@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [MTD] BLOCK_RO: Readonly Block Device Layer Over MTD References: <20061117184055.569da7ad@localhost.localdomain> <1163855713.5597.70.camel@sauron> <1163856784.20835.2.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <1163856955.5597.71.camel@sauron> <45619C60.7070400@ru.mvista.com> <1164026819.5597.88.camel@sauron> In-Reply-To: <1164026819.5597.88.camel@sauron> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Vitaly Wool , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 15:15 +0300, Vitaly Wool wrote: > >>B/c it introduces new fields in generic mtd structures which are already >>overcomplicated, and modifies a lot of generic code. I'd expect that >>with this patch applied stuff like mtdcore.c and mtdpart.c becomes >>exposed to possible licensing issues which is definitely not what we aim ;-) > > > I am talking about something like this: > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2004-May/009683.html > > I do not see it introducing any new field. > I realized it exactly the same way on top of readoly block device. Patch, you talking about, definitely needs #ifdef-s and it waste kernel RAM statically allocating block_map, block_top, block_scantop MAX_MTD_DEVICES times :-).