This is Alex's "[PATCH v5] hw/block: better reporting on pflash backing file mismatch" with the padding split off into its own patch, and both resulting patches applied to pflash_cfi02.c. I downgraded it to RFC for two reasons:
1. I think the padding patches should not be applied. I'll reply to PATCH 2 to explain why. 2. I left the update of pflash_cfi02.c as separate fixup patches, so we can easily ignore them while we discuss 1. v6: * Split padding into its own patch. * Delete "It should be padded to a multiple of the flash block size." comment. Happy to put it back if you can enlighten me about its purpose. * Improve both commit messages. * New fixup patches to pflash_cfi02.c. Alex Bennée (2): hw/block: better reporting on pflash backing file mismatch hw/block: Pad undersized read-only images with 0xFF Markus Armbruster (2): fixup! hw/block: better reporting on pflash backing file mismatch fixup! hw/block: Pad undersized read-only images with 0xFF hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- hw/block/pflash_cfi02.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) -- 2.17.2
