Re: [PATCH v2 00/24] blk: Rationalise the block interface

Hi Johan, On Sun, 14 Aug 2022 at 00:34, Johan Jonker wrote: > > > > On 8/12/22 17:11, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Johan, > > > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 at 07:51, Johan Jonker wrote: > >> > >> Hi Simon and others, > >> > >> Some comments. Have a look if it's useful. > >> Include is an example of how c

Re: [PATCH v2 00/24] blk: Rationalise the block interface

On 8/12/22 17:11, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Johan, > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 at 07:51, Johan Jonker wrote: >> >> Hi Simon and others, >> >> Some comments. Have a look if it's useful. >> Include is an example of how currently a new Rockchip external RKNAND FTL >> block device must be included in U

Re: [PATCH v2 00/24] blk: Rationalise the block interface

Hi Johan, On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 at 07:51, Johan Jonker wrote: > > Hi Simon and others, > > Some comments. Have a look if it's useful. > Include is an example of how currently a new Rockchip external RKNAND FTL > block device must be included in U-boot. > Changes must be made all over the place. EF

Re: [PATCH v2 00/24] blk: Rationalise the block interface

Hi Simon and others, Some comments. Have a look if it's useful. Include is an example of how currently a new Rockchip external RKNAND FTL block device must be included in U-boot. Changes must be made all over the place. EFI has now become a somewhat "obligation" for block devices, then handling

[PATCH v2 00/24] blk: Rationalise the block interface

The block interface has two separate implementations, one using driver model and one not. The latter is really only needed for SPL, where size constraints allegedly don't allow use of driver model. Of course we still need space for filesystems and other code, so it isn't clear that driver model is