change to of MTD partition parsing
galak at kernel.crashing.org
Tue Aug 25 12:04:53 EST 2009
We need a better solution to the problem. What does the device tree
on SLOF look like?
On Aug 12, 2009, at 10:07 AM, Benjamin Krill wrote:
> Hi Kumar,
> slof has a further node inside the flash node which is not a partition
> entry. The old code just used all children and since the further node
> isn't a partition not all needed properties are there.
> * Kumar Gala | 2009-08-12 09:46:10 [-0500]:
>> The following commit breaks the previous definition of flash
>> partitions according to
>> Documentation/powerpc/dts-bindings/mtd-physmap.txt. Using the
>> 'name' field is bad practice. What was going
>> on w/the SLOF case?
>> - k
>> commit 4b08e149c0e02e97ec49c2a31d14a0d3a02f8074
>> Author: Benjamin Krill <ben at codiert.org>
>> Date: Fri Jan 23 17:18:05 2009 +0100
>> [MTD] ofpart: Check name property to determine partition nodes.
>> SLOF has a further node which could not be evaluated
>> by the current routine. The current routine returns
>> because the node hasn't the required reg property. As
>> fix this patch adds a check to determine the partition
>> child nodes. If the node is not a partition the number
>> of total partitions will be decreased and loop continues
>> with the next nodes.
>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Krill <ben at codiert.org>
>> Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse at intel.com>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev