[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y139jpx5.fsf@prevas.dk>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:18:14 +0200
From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Ulf
Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Andy Shevchenko
<andy@...nel.org>, Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, INAGAKI Hiroshi
<musashino.open@...il.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Al
Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Christian Heusel <christian@...sel.eu>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, Miquel
Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, Lorenzo Bianconi
<lorenzo@...nel.org>, upstream@...oha.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] dt-bindings: mmc: Document support for partition
table in mmc-card
Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com> writes:
> Document support for defining a partition table in the mmc-card node.
>
> This is needed if the eMMC doesn't have a partition table written and
> the bootloader of the device load data by using absolute offset of the
> block device. This is common on embedded device that have eMMC installed
> to save space and have non removable block devices.
>
> If an OF partition table is detected, any partition table written in the
> eMMC will be ignored and won't be parsed.
>
> eMMC provide a generic disk for user data and if supported (JEDEC 4.4+)
> also provide two additional disk ("boot0" and "boot1") for special usage
> of boot operation where normally is stored the bootloader or boot info.
>
This looks quite useful.
Could this be extended to also be applicable to the four "general
purpose" hardware partitions, i.e. what is exposed as /dev/mmcblkXgpY ?
These would often also contain some fundamental boot data at various
offsets but also, as for the boot partitions, often without a regular
partition table.
The eMMC spec consistently refers to the boot partitions as "boot
partition 1" and "boot partition 2"; the boot0/boot1 naming is kind of a
linux'ism. Similarly, the general purpose partitions are _almost_
exclusively referred to as 1 through 4, except (at least in my copy),
the heading for 7.4.89 says GP_SIZE_MULT_GP0 - GP_SIZE_MULT_GP3, but
then goes on to describe GP_SIZE_MULT_1_y through GP_SIZE_MULT_4_y. So I
wonder if on the binding level one should use partitions-{boot1,boot2}
and, if implemented, partitions-{gp1,gp2,gp3,gp4} ?
Rasmus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists