On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:14:17 +0000 Caizhiyong <caizhiy...@hisilicon.com> > wrote: > >> In the previous version, adjust the cmdline parser code to library-style >> code, and move it to a separate file "block/cmdline-parser.c", we can use >> it in some client code. there is no any functionality change in the >> adjusting. >> >> this patch use cmdline parser lib. >> >> For further information, see "https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/6/550"; > > Thanks for doing this. Could we please get some acked-by's or, > preferably, tested-by's from the MTD people?
Nobody has had time to test this on MTD, it seems, and as such, I strongly recommend you do not force it through -mm. We are perfectly capable of merging it through the MTD tree if it ever gets proper vetting by people in MTD (not just on block devices), and I am well aware of this patch set's existence. However, the patch really provides little to no benefit to the MTD subsystem at the moment, at the added cost of reviewing the small differences in parsing. For some reason, Cai decided to make small differences in the parser between drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c and block/cmdline-parser.c, and it is not obvious that these differences retain the same parsing. For instance, according to my code read-through, the block device parser seems to accept multiple partitions to be specified with "-" (meaning "fill the remaining device"). MTD already has code that rejects such a parser string outright. So, I'd recommend one of the following: (1) We (MTD users) make more time to properly test this patch and post relevant results (i.e., tested partition strings) or (2) Somebody (Cai?) spend time to actually make block/cmdline-parser.c fully equivalent to the parser in drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c. That means it should be trivial to compare the two and say "yes, these are equivalent". That is currently not the case, AFAICT. Without one of those two, I will give my NAK. Brian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
