From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
Tudor Ambarus <Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: implement proper partition handling
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 10:46:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200110104626.0531d556@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200110092855.79f18339@xps13>
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 09:28:55 +0100
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com> wrote on Thu, 9 Jan
> 2020 20:37:22 +0100:
>
> > On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 20:23:58 +0100
> > Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Boris,
> > >
> > > Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com> wrote on Thu, 9 Jan
> > > 2020 20:13:55 +0100:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 19:45:56 +0100
> > > > Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Richard,
> > > > >
> > > > > Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote on Thu, 9 Jan 2020 19:43:04
> > > > > +0100 (CET):
> > > > >
> > > > > > Miquel,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> > > > > > >> What problem does this solve?
> > > > > > >> ...beside of a nice diffstat which removes more than it adds. :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is much easier to escalade to the top most "master" device when
> > > > > > > there are multiple levels of partitioning, which was not cleanly
> > > > > > > described IMHO. Also it is already used in the MLC-in-pseudo-SLC-mode
> > > > > > > series :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ok. In fact I "found" this patch my looking at the SLC emulation patches.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > +static inline struct mtd_info *mtd_get_master(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > > > > > >> > +{
> > > > > > >> > + while (mtd->parent)
> > > > > > >> > + mtd = mtd->parent;
> > > > > > >> > +
> > > > > > >> > + return mtd;
> > > > > > >> > +}
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> So, parent == master?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > top most parent (the one without parent) == master !
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> When I create a MTD ontop of UBI using gluebi, who will be parent/master?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't really understand the issue here?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's say I have mtd0 with an ubi and a volume "xxx". After enabling
> > > > > > gluebi a new mtd1 will arrive on the system.
> > > > > > The stacking is mtd0 -> ubi (volume xxx) -> mtd1.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is much clearer, thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is now a relationship between mtd1 and mtd0?
> > > > >
> > > > > No there is none.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'd expect mtd1's parent being mtd0.
> > > > >
> > > > > This would be a new feature, right? I don't think it is the case today.
> > > >
> > > > We definitely don't want mtd1 to appear as a partition of mtd0 in that
> > > > case (blocks in mtd1 can't be mapped to blocks in mtd0 without the UBI
> > > > layer being involved). Maybe it'd be clearer if we move the parent
> > > > field to mtd_part and add an MTD_IS_PARTITION flag. Or maybe we can
> > > > just choose a better name.
> > >
> > > I prefer the name change. I think the current struct organization
> > > is right. What do you suggest?
> >
> > I don't have a better name, sorry.
>
> Actually I find ->parent totally descriptive, and in Richard's example,
> I would not call mtd1 as mtd0's parent, it's more like a "top virtual
> device" but certainly not a "direct" parent.
It depends what kind of parenting we're talking about :P. From the
device model perspective, mtd1's parent is ubi0. From the MTD partition
perspective, mtd1 has no parent (it's a master MTD device). The problem
here is that 'parent' is vague enough that it lets people think it's
representing more than a partition -> partition_parent relationship,
hence my suggestion to move the field to mtd_part so it can be
namespaced in mtd->part.parent.
>
> mtd->direct_parent would work but I think it is a bit too long and most
> of the people would not understand why we call it this way, instead of
> just "parent".
->partition_parent would be more accurate, but I agree with you, I'm
not a big fan of those long names. Maybe ->container?
>
> I would like to take this patch into 5.6, so please tell me what you
> prefer ("parent" being the most straightforward and simple solution to
> me :) )
I think the most important thing here is documenting what this field
is representing so people can refer to the doc if they get confused.
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-10 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-30 11:19 [PATCH v2] mtd: implement proper partition handling Miquel Raynal
2020-01-08 23:34 ` Richard Weinberger
2020-01-09 18:13 ` Miquel Raynal
2020-01-09 18:43 ` Richard Weinberger
2020-01-09 18:45 ` Miquel Raynal
2020-01-09 19:13 ` Boris Brezillon
2020-01-09 19:23 ` Miquel Raynal
2020-01-09 19:37 ` Boris Brezillon
2020-01-10 8:28 ` Miquel Raynal
2020-01-10 9:46 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2020-01-10 9:55 ` Miquel Raynal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200110104626.0531d556@collabora.com \
--to=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).