From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 18:08:47 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/4] ubifs: Modify ubifs u-boot wrapper function prototypes for generic fs use In-Reply-To: <20150828145238.GF25532@bill-the-cat> References: <1440266693-15664-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <1440266693-15664-2-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <55DC4ACD.3000401@denx.de> <55DC5235.4090703@redhat.com> <20150828145238.GF25532@bill-the-cat> Message-ID: <55E47C0F.9080702@redhat.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi, On 28-08-15 16:52, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 01:32:05PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 25-08-15 13:00, Heiko Schocher wrote: >>> Hello Hans, >>> >>> Am 22.08.2015 um 20:04 schrieb Hans de Goede: >>>> Modify the ubifs u-boot wrapper function prototypes for generic fs use, >>>> and give them their own header file. >>>> >>>> This is a preparation patch for adding ubifs support to the generic fs >>>> code from fs/fs.c. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede >>>> --- >>>> common/cmd_ubifs.c | 14 +++-------- >>>> fs/ubifs/ubifs.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>> fs/ubifs/ubifs.h | 6 +---- >>>> include/ubifs_uboot.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 4 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 include/ubifs_uboot.h >>> >>> Only one nitpick, beside of this, you can add my: >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Heiko Schocher >>> >>>> diff --git a/common/cmd_ubifs.c b/common/cmd_ubifs.c >>>> index 8e9a4e5..0a3dd24 100644 >>>> --- a/common/cmd_ubifs.c >>>> +++ b/common/cmd_ubifs.c >>>> @@ -15,11 +15,10 @@ >>>> #include >>>> #include >>>> #include >>>> - >>>> -#include "../fs/ubifs/ubifs.h" >>>> +#include >>>> >>>> static int ubifs_initialized; >>>> -static int ubifs_mounted; >>>> +int ubifs_mounted; >>> >>> later you add "extern int ubifs_mounted" in include/ubifs_uboot.h >>> >>> Maybe you want to add a function, which returns the state >>> of this var and let the var static? >> >> Yes that would be cleaner, I'll fix the patch-set to do >> things that way. >> >> Thanks for the reviews. >> >> So when the time come comes (when v2015.10 is out), how do >> we merge these 3, shall I take them upstream through the >> linux-sunxi tree, or do you want me to send a v2 with this fixed, >> and then you take them upstream ? > > I can just take 'em all into master :) Heiko and I both thought we were too far in the cycle for that, but I must admit I do not see that much chance of these changes causing regressions and they are a nice improvement. So I'll send a v2 for you to merge, unless Heiko objects. Regards, Hans