On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Tomas Winkler <tom...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That's correct, I guess someone didn't read the spec till the end when
> adding rpmb block device.
> though also looks like that the software guys where drinking up in the
> bar while jdec committee has met.

:D

>> +/* Device type for RPMB character devices */
>> +static dev_t rpmb_devt;
>
> This is mmc_rpmb device not 'rpmb' as there are other storage devices
> that provide RPMB partition.

OK fixed it.

>> +
>> +/* Bus type for RPMB character devices */
>> +static struct bus_type rpmb_bus_type = {
>> +       .name = "rpmb",
>> +};
>
> Same here, mmc_rpmb_... , and other place bellow.

OK fixed it.

>> +struct mmc_rpmb_data {
(...)
> would keep also partition access bit needed for the partition switching.
(...)
>>  static int __mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd(struct mmc_card *card, struct mmc_blk_data 
>> *md,
>> -                              struct mmc_blk_ioc_data *idata)
>> +                              struct mmc_blk_ioc_data *idata, bool 
>> rpmb_ioctl)
> Don't remember now if this is for eMMC but in future there might be
> more then one RPMB partition  on the device
> and boolean will not work here. rather use target_part, tho bits are
> exhausted there too.
(...)
>> -       bool is_rpmb = false;
>> +       unsigned int target_part;
> should come as a function input.
(...)
>> +                       ret = mmc_blk_alloc_rpmb_part(card, md,
>> +                               card->part[idx].size >> 9,
>> +                               card->part[idx].name);
> Extract partition access bits form    card->part[idx].part_cfg,

OK I am trying my best with this too...

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Reply via email to