Hi Huang,

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 10:26:07 -0400 Huang Shijie <shij...@gmail.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> index 4558e0f..fc960a3 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> @@ -344,7 +344,8 @@ static int parse_cmdline_partitions(struct mtd_info 
> *master,
>                                              "%s: partitioning exceeds flash 
> size, truncating\n",
>                                              part->mtd_id);
>                                       part->parts[i].size = master->size - 
> offset;
> -                                     part->num_parts = i;
> +                                     part->num_parts = i + 1;
> +                                     break;

Your analysis seems right, but let me offer an alternative approach.

I would simply:

-                                       part->num_parts = i;

(and not replace it with anything).

The specified cmdline partitions might not be ordered (according to
start offset), so next partition specified after the truncated one might
define a partition at the beginning of the device, which is okay
(regardless the truncation of current partition).

Your patch skips the definitions of next partitions, which can be legit.

I agree specifying "unsorted" partitions is not commonly used (and it
might make no sense when using the "remaining" syntax), but it is legit
to define all partitions _explicitly_ with their size@offset in an
unordered fashion.

Regards,
Shmulik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to