Hi,
<snip>
But using raw partition descriptors[1] does not work with the above
[1]
https://docs.u-boot.org/en/latest/android/fastboot.html#raw-partition-descriptors
Right, not all features will work with generic block backend, but it's a start!
+
+config FASTBOOT_FLASH_BLOCK_DEVICE_ID
+ int "Define FASTBOOT block device id"
+ depends on FASTBOOT_FLASH_BLOCK
+ help
+ "Fastboot block device id"
This is similar as CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV, no?
No, the MMC one makes the mmc type implicit, while the block one
can target any block device (and mmc)
I understand, but when CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_BLOCK_INTERFACE_NAME="mmc",
CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV and FASTBOOT_FLASH_BLOCK_DEVICE_ID are the
same thing.
To me, it's confusing to have similar KConfig entries based on interface
type.
If we really want to do it this way, then we should add a safeguard in
the code: test if FASTBOOT_FLASH_BLOCK_INTERFACE_NAME is "mmc" and if so, add a
warning to recommend using FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC instead.
What's your opinion on this?
Perhaps, not sure it's really problematic
Maybe not for you, because you have the history on this project. But to
a newcomer, having both options seems a bit strange.
If we look at how the blk-uclass is implemented, it inconsisent with how
it's done with fastboot.
longer term, I'd rather deprecate the CONFIG_FASTBOOT_FLASH_MMC_DEV
entry so that we use FASTBOOT_FLASH_BLOCK_INTERFACE_NAME for everything
(including mmc)
I understand that you might not have the time for doing so, so as a
first step can we add a (printf) warning in the fastboot block layer
when the interface name is mmc ?
Yeah my goal is to first have a support for generic block, merging
both makes sense.
Ok I'll add a warning
Thanks,
Neil
