Re: [PATCH 1/5] disk: Add an option for partitions in SPL

[Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>]

Hi Tom,

On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 at 12:31, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 12:24:41PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 at 06:49, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:10:01PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > >
> > > > In some cases we do not want to enable partition support in SPL. Add an
> > > > option to allow this.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > >  disk/Kconfig               | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
> > > >  disk/Makefile              |  6 +++---
> > > >  drivers/block/blk-uclass.c |  2 +-
> > > >  3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > I'm not sure this makes sense?  I thought when I looked in to this last
> > > the only place where we had partition code being linked and not
> > > discarded in the case of SPL and no devices that would have partitions
> > > on them was one xilinx platform.  How do we get to bringing in partition
> > > code and not having something that uses it?
> >
> > The problem is that drivers are not discarded and Takahiro's series
> > adds a driver for partitions.
> >
> > So yes, we were able to get away with this before, but cannot now.
>
> Things which aren't needed / used need to be discarded.  So we might
> have use cases for this, yes (I was thinking after I sent that OK, yes,
> imx probably tends to not need partition support since we read at raw
> offsets, outside from maybe falcon mode using targets).  But we
> shouldn't generally be now pulling in drivers that aren't functionally
> used.

We don't have a way of detecting whether a driver is used, with driver
model, so the only option is Kconfig. Does that make sense? Please let
me know if there is any disconnect here.

Regards,
Simon