On Thu, 28 Jul 2022 at 14:30, Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Am 28.07.2022 um 11:46 hat Peter Maydell geschrieben: > > On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 20:03, Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > If the existing types aren't good enough (I don't have an opinion on > > > whether IF_PFLASH is a good match), let's add a new one. But a specific > > > new one, not just "other". > > > > I think the common thread is "this isn't what anybody actually thinks > > of as being a 'disk', but we would like to back it with a block device > > anyway". That can cover a fair range of possibilities... > > How confident are we that no board will ever have two devices of this > kind? > > As long as every board has at most one, if=other is a bad user interface > in terms of descriptiveness, but still more or less workable as long as > you know what it means for the specific board you use.
Extremely non-confident, but that holds for all these things, unless we add new IF_* for every possible new thing: IF_PFLASH IF_EEPROM IF_EFUSE IF_BBRAM ... ? thanks -- PMM
