[PATCH v2 0/4] Patches to allow consistent mmc / mmcblk numbering w/ device tree
dianders at chromium.org
Fri Apr 29 15:22:50 PDT 2016
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:56:38PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:39:35PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> > [didn't read most of your reply]
>> >> Really I just reposted it several times because I notice that you seem
>> >> to ignore many points of my emails. I was really hoping to get you to
>> >> address this point. I notice that you still didn't. Either you are
>> >> just trying to annoy me, or you don't have an answer to how my patch
>> >> series hurts you.
>> > I don't see you treating Rob with the same contempt that you have
>> > treated me in this thread, despite Rob and myself both telling you
>> > basically the same thing.
>> Rob wrote a nice thoughtful reply and I tried to give a nice
>> thoughtful reply back to him. He raised some good points and I raised
>> some good points back to him. I look forward to his future thoughts
>> on the topic.
> Meanwhile, I've pointed out that you appear to be coming from a
> misunderstanding (that's certainly clear because you believed
> initially that grub did something it doesn't), showing that the
> "problem" you have is no different from the majority of other
> systems running Linux, and you treat me with contempt.
> What are you going to do to resolve this?
As I tried to indicate in earlier emails, I don't actually care how
grub works in this case. It was originally meant to illustrate the
other people's workflows and mine are not the same. If they have a
solution that works for them, that's great.
I want my MMC and MMCBLK device numbers to be sane and consistent to
help me parse through dmesg and sysfs. If it happens to also make it
easy / possible to specify a root filesystem using "mmcblkN" that's
great and I'll probably take advantage of that.
I'm very sorry if those using SATA and ATA disks don't have a way to
get sane and consistent device number ordering. I really am. ...but
just because they don't have a well defined ordering doesn't mean
those of us using MMC should have to suffer. ...and I don't think
giving a sane ordering to MMC devices hurts anyone, does it?
More information about the linux-arm-kernel