Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-98338-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 22:17:17 +0100 (CET)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Daniel Golle <daniel@makrotopia.org>
Cc: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>, 
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>, 
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, 
	linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>, 
	devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, 
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Message-ID: <1754825522.38834.1710105437883.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
In-Reply-To: <ZdvV1KABu_UCSL7B@makrotopia.org>
References: <cover.1702952891.git.daniel@makrotopia.org> <82ceb13954f7e701bf47c112333e7b15a57fc360.1702952891.git.daniel@makrotopia.org> <20240219120156.383a1427@xps-13> <1209094181.98490.1708899174329.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> <ZdvV1KABu_UCSL7B@makrotopia.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 7/7] mtd: ubi: provide NVMEM layer over UBI volumes
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Topic: provide NVMEM layer over UBI volumes
Thread-Index: 16y/pO9tIckbepFtGo93wkKFo34z8w==

Daniel,

----- Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mail -----
> Von: "Daniel Golle" <daniel@makrotopia.org>
>> Finally(!), I had enough time to look.
>> Thanks for addressing all my comments form the previous series.
>> Patches applied.
>=20
> It's an enourmous coicident that you are writing just now that I found
> a sizeof(int)-related problem which triggers a compiler warning when
> building the UBI NVMEM provider on 32-bit platforms. I was just about
> to prepare an updated series. Literally in this minute.
> Should I still send the whole updates series or only the final patch
> (as the necessary change is there) or a follow-up patch fixing the
> original patch?

I have just merged your fixup patch. So all good.

>>=20
>> I have only one tiny request, can you share the lockdep spalt
>> you encountered in ubi_notify_add() regarding mtd_table_mutex
>> and ubi_devices_mutex? The solutions looks okay to me, but
>> if you have more details that would be great.
>=20
> I will setup a test build to reproduce the original warning and
> let you know shortly.

Any news on that?

BTW: Is there a nice way to test this with nandsim in qemu?
I'd love being able to test all ubi attach code paths on my test setup.

Thanks,
//richard