[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7027ccdc-878a-420e-a7ea-5156e1d67b8a@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:49:48 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Thomas Weißschuh
<linux@...ssschuh.net>, Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>,
Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>, Christian Brauner
<brauner@...nel.org>, Christian Heusel <christian@...sel.eu>,
Min Li <min15.li@...sung.com>, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Christian Loehle <CLoehle@...erstone.com>, Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
Yeqi Fu <asuk4.q@...il.com>, Victor Shih <victor.shih@...esyslogic.com.tw>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
Dominique Martinet <dominique.martinet@...ark-techno.com>,
"Ricardo B. Marliere" <ricardo@...liere.net>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] block: add new genhd flag GENHD_FL_NVMEM
On 3/21/24 12:33, Daniel Golle wrote:
> Add new flag to destinguish block devices which may act as an NVMEM
> provider.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
> ---
> include/linux/blkdev.h | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index c3e8f7cf96be9..f2c4f280d7619 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -81,11 +81,13 @@ struct partition_meta_info {
> * ``GENHD_FL_NO_PART``: partition support is disabled. The kernel will not
> * scan for partitions from add_disk, and users can't add partitions manually.
> *
> + * ``GENHD_FL_NVMEM``: the block device should be considered as NVMEM provider.
> */
> enum {
> GENHD_FL_REMOVABLE = 1 << 0,
> GENHD_FL_HIDDEN = 1 << 1,
> GENHD_FL_NO_PART = 1 << 2,
> + GENHD_FL_NVMEM = 1 << 3,
> };
What would break if this flag wouldn't exist?
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists