Hi Rasmus,
On 11/11/25 9:00 AM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11 2025, Anshul Dalal <[email protected]> wrote:
static int do_part_set(int argc, char *const argv[])
{
const char *devname, *partstr, *typestr;
@@ -273,6 +282,8 @@ static int do_part(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, int
argc,
return do_part_size(argc - 2, argv + 2);
else if (!strcmp(argv[1], "number"))
return do_part_number(argc - 2, argv + 2);
+ else if (!strcmp(argv[1], "name"))
+ return do_part_name(argc - 2, argv + 2);
else if (!strcmp(argv[1], "types"))
return do_part_types(argc - 2, argv + 2);
else if (!strcmp(argv[1], "set"))
@@ -305,6 +316,9 @@ U_BOOT_CMD(
"part number <interface> <dev> <part> <varname>\n"
" - set environment variable to the partition number using the partition
name\n"
" part must be specified as partition name\n"
+ "part name <interface> <dev> <part> <varname>\n"
Nit: Shouldn't this be part name <interface> <dev> <part> [varname]
instead?
Yes, probably, I did notice that, but I preferred being consistent with
the existing cases which also do not indicate varname as optional.
Let's not be consistent with a mistake if it can be fixed without
breaking compatibility. From what I gathered, it's a simple help text
(and maybe doc) update, so i think it's better to fix it.
Cheers,
Quentin
