Message-ID: <fe18edf0-dea7-49fa-a646-e06afddc84ee@kernel.dk>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 08:42:18 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...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>,
 Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>,
 Christian Heusel <christian@...sel.eu>, Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
 Riyan Dhiman <riyandhiman14@...il.com>,
 Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli@...aro.org>,
 Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge@...ndries.io>, Li Zhijian
 <lizhijian@...itsu.com>,
 Dominique Martinet <dominique.martinet@...ark-techno.com>,
 Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
 linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
 Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, upstream@...oha.com,
 Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
 Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/6] block: partition table OF support

On 10/8/24 8:33 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 at 15:24, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/8/24 3:10 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 at 22:22, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:11:40 +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
>>>>> this is an initial proposal to complete support for manually defining
>>>>> partition table.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some background on this. Many OEM on embedded device (modem, router...)
>>>>> are starting to migrate from NOR/NAND flash to eMMC. The reason for this
>>>>> is that OEM are starting to require more and more space for the firmware
>>>>> and price difference is becoming so little that using eMMC is only benefits
>>>>> and no cons.
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> Applied, thanks!
>>>>
>>>> [1/6] block: add support for defining read-only partitions
>>>>       commit: 03cb793b26834ddca170ba87057c8f883772dd45
>>>> [2/6] docs: block: Document support for read-only partition in cmdline part
>>>>       commit: 62adb971e515d1bb0e9e555f3dd1d5dc948cf6a1
>>>> [3/6] block: introduce add_disk_fwnode()
>>>>       commit: e5f587242b6072ffab4f4a084a459a59f3035873
>>>> [4/6] mmc: block: attach partitions fwnode if found in mmc-card
>>>>       commit: 45ff6c340ddfc2dade74d5b7a8962c778ab7042c
>>>> [5/6] block: add support for partition table defined in OF
>>>>       commit: 884555b557e5e6d41c866e2cd8d7b32f50ec974b
>>>> [6/6] dt-bindings: mmc: Document support for partition table in mmc-card
>>>>       commit: 06f39701d0666d89dd3c86ff0b163c7139b7ba2d
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think we may need another merging strategy for this as I quite big
>>> changes in the pipe for the mmc block device this cycle.
>>>
>>> Would it be possible for you to drop the mmc patches and instead share
>>> an immutable branch with the block changes that I can pull in, so I
>>> can take the mmc changes?
>>
>> I mean we can, but the mmc changes in here are pretty self contained.
>> I'd rather avoid rebasing the block tree for that, given how small the
>> changes are. If it conflicts, should be easy enough to resolve.
> 
> Okay, let's give it a try and see how it goes.
> 
>>
>> You an also just pull in the block tree now and resolve the conflict.
>> There's not a whole lot in there yet outside of this series.
> 
> Let's wait and see. If we get some conflicts, you can always set a tag
> to the latest of the mmc commits in your tree that I can pull instead.

Yep, sounds like plan!

-- 
Jens Axboe

Powered by blists - more mailing lists