[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/6] arm: socfpga: cyclone5-socdk: Enabling mtd partitioning layout

[Marek Vasut]

On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 01:53:53 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2015-12-14 13:20:28, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 12:51:16 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Mon 2015-12-14 12:31:32, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 12:26:39 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > On Mon 2015-12-14 12:09:08, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 08:54:38 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > > (Please, trim your emails when replying)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Try this:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > mtdparts=1m(u-boot),256k(env1),256k(env2),14848k(boot),112m(r
> > > > > > > > oot) ,- at 1 536k (UBI)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > This will create overlapping partitions "boot,root" and "UBI"
> > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Just because you can does not mean that you should. This looks
> > > > > > > like a nasty trap for a user.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Please explain in detail why do you think so.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Please make a 200 page study of human psychology explaining that
> > > > > noone would ever be confused by two overlapping partitions :-).
> > > > 
> > > > Add a comment explaining the situation and reasoning behind that,
> > > > problem solved.
> > > 
> > > We do partitions so that people don't overwrite data by
> > > mistake. Having overlapping partitions kind of defeats the purpose.
> > 
> > I'd expect that in case you are fiddling with MTD on a bootloader level,
> > you have at least a vague idea of what you are doing.
> 
> Yes, but people should not have to expect we prepare traps for them.

I sense the overlapping partitions are a matter of taste here.

> > > Just because trap is documented does not mean that it is not
> > > nasty. 199.95 pages to go.
> > 
> > Do you have a better idea how to satisfy both sets of people, ones which
> > want kernel on a separate partition and ones which want to use single
> > UBI volume then ?
> 
> If you expect people to read a comments explaining a situation, you
> can easily add an explanation and (commented out) alternative
> configutation that can be used.

I do not want to maintain multiple configurations, especially is there is
known working alternative which covers all the usecases.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut