Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support

From	Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support
Date	2017-06-02 01:10 +0200
Message-ID	<tNHo5-IM-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <tI00p-7v7-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <tI93J-4Nh-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <tNDkt-6hn-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tNFYZ-8b0-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tNGLn-eH-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On 02/06/17 10:23, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 09:30:07PM +0000, Chris Packham wrote:
>> On 02/06/17 06:43, Brian Norris wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 05:29:11PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
>>>> Can we fix allocate_partition() to properly handle the
>>>> master->erasesize == 0 case instead of doing that?
>>>
>>> Is everything actually ready for the eraseblock size to be 0?
>>
>> That was my initial motivation for faking it.
> 
> Understood. I think it's probably better to avoid hacking drivers like
> you were about to, but I was also curious if anyone had thought through
> the implications of *not* forcing a non-zero size.
> 
>>> That would
>>> seem surprising to many applications, I would think. Can you, for
>>> instance, even use UBI on such a device?
>>
>> I've tried ext2 and I believe Andrew has tried minix fs. We're talking
>> SRAM so UBI/UBIFS doesn't really provide much benefit for this use-case.
> 
> Right. But that's not necessarily true for all NO_ERASE devices, so we'd
> probably want to think about that before allowing it.

Do we need a flag to indicate SRAM-like properties? I assume there is a 
difference between NO_ERASE on ROM devices where there is just no way of 
erasing the data. For {S,F,M}RAM there is no block erase operation but 
you can overwrite data to destroy it (which is actually my use-case with 
this SPI SRAM). I was tempted to set erase_size = 1 at one point which 
in my mind was technically accurate but would probably upset the mtd 
layer just as much as 0.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> - 2017-06-01 20:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> - 2017-06-01 22:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> - 2017-06-02 00:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> - 2017-06-02 11:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz> - 2017-06-01 23:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> - 2017-06-02 00:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 3/4] mtd: mchp23k256: add partitioning support Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz> - 2017-06-02 01:10 +0200

csiph-web