RE: [PATCH 1/2] mtdpart: memory accessor interface for MTD layer
From: David Woodhouse
Date: Wed Aug 04 2010 - 07:09:11 EST
On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 03:31 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Point is to ensure that enough of the right context
> information is available to initialize correctly.
> So the right data is extracted and passed on.
Forgive me if I'm being dim (and in particular, please forgive me if I'm
going over something that was already discussed; I know it's been a
while). But I don't see why it needs to be passed through the core MTD
To take the simple case of an unpartitioned MTD device -- why can't the
map driver (or whatever) just call the maccessor setup function for
itself, directly, right after calling add_mtd_device() with its
newly-probed MTD device?
And for partitions, why can't it do the same, on the appropriate
OK, the answer to the latter question is that you don't actually *have*
the pointers to each partition you register. But that's easily fixed.
If we make add_mtd_partitions() take an extra 'struct mtd_info **'
argument and put pointers to the slave mtd 'devices' into that, it means
that your board driver *can* reliably get the mtd pointer for the fourth
partition, or whatever it needs. And can then just do the memory
accessor setup for itself.
Isn't that enough?
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx Intel Corporation
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/