[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/7] common: Implement A/B metadata

[Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@gmail.com>]

Hi Simon, Igor, All,

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 07:55:30PM +0200, Eugeniu Rosca wrote:
> Hi Simon, Igor, Ruslan,
> 
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:05 AM Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> wrote:
> > Hi Ruslan,
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 at 12:57, Ruslan Trofymenko
> > <ruslan.trofymenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> [..]
> > > +struct android_bootloader_message {
> >
> > How about andr_bl_msg ? Similarly below
> 
> Simon, I am currently working on a new U-Boot command which requires
> the same AOSP header in-tree. Since the v4 of the whole "A/B support"
> series is still WIP by Igor (Ruslan?), may I kindly ask you whether
> you feel strong about these specific header and struct renames? We've
> recently got some feedback from Tom [1] that it should be OK to keep
> the out-of-tree headers untouched. My main motivation is 1) minimizing
> the effort of updating this specific header from upstream and 2) using
> the U-Boot-compliant header/struct names in my WIP changes. I am open
> minded if the original filename is not preserved, but the struct
> renames imply some amount of changes in the comments (see [2]). Also,
> renaming the structs will imply parsing and verifying the comments
> each time the header is updated. It's this kind of tiny bit of
> integration effort which you always want to avoid, since it doesn't
> require any creativity and can't be automated easily. I am looking
> forward for your feedback.
> 
> Dear Igor, Ruslan,
> 
> How should we handle the import of
> bootloader_message/include/bootloader_message/bootloader_message.h ?
> If it takes more time for you to submit the next version of A/B
> support, would it be fine for you if I do the importing of the header
> myself along with my other patches which depend on it?
> 
> [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1044158/#2129429
> [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1044158/#2109299

Apologize for making another iteration on this, but what about below
solution WRT struct renames upon importing bootloader_message.h in-tree.
The following typedef statements (placed in the imported header) would
allow keeping the original structures and the associated comments
untouched (hence speeding up the updates from the source), while U-Boot
would use use the new/rightmost types mirroring the upstream ones.

typedef struct bootloader_message       andr_bl_msg;
typedef struct bootloader_message_ab    andr_bl_msg_ab;
typedef struct bootloader_control       andr_bl_control;

> 
> Many thanks,
> Eugeniu.