Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-94667-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240306-mmc-partswitch-v1-1-bf116985d950@codewreck.org>
 <Zegx5PCtg6hs8zyp@trax> <CACRpkdYZrDgVVCp2bqJqY1BpeHSXDWbRSqk6d=N_QhC4OVv=Ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zeh8HGDToMoHglD2@trax> <CACRpkdZ1ervTXj6++oBPDNJT3TpVgPeYsyhaEMRYavJQ5iZPqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPDyKFqYDPgNjSkpH=XATkUY2XtjsaDstChcAnGxoas4jgDVfw@mail.gmail.com> <CACRpkdaUUD8UMp9GxNVQfdAM8QV_LASp-k5hh1cvQrGVHKySKA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdaUUD8UMp9GxNVQfdAM8QV_LASp-k5hh1cvQrGVHKySKA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 23:38:53 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFrdki=OyQWHghF6R3ukv9R6FRQfxRbUrSKfVJ+CNCjXTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: part_switch: fixes switch on gp3 partition
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>
Cc: "Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries" <jorge@foundries.io>, Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>, 
	Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@intel.com>, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	Dominique Martinet <dominique.martinet@atmark-techno.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 20:49, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote=
:
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 4:57=E2=80=AFPM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.or=
g> wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 15:38, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> w=
rote:
>
> > > We should probably rename it part_cfg because that is what we
> > > store in it, it's assigned from card->part[idx].part_cfg.
> > >
> > > Then the id field in mmc_rpmb_data should be deleted along
> > > with all the IDA counter code etc and the partition name hardcoded
> > > to be "0" as there will never be anything else.
> >
> > Seems reasonable to me. Are you thinking of sending a cleanup patch on
> > top of $subject patch?
>?
> Yes I can do that once this patch is finalized and merged.

Great!

I don't think the $subject patch is perfect, but it's slim and
suitable for stable - and of course it seems to do the job well. I am
therefore queuing it for fixes, thanks everyone for helping out!

Kind regards
Uffe