Re: [PATCH v6] mtd: handle partitioning on devices with 0 erasesize

2017-06-13 Thread Brian Norris
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 08:00:42AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:58:31 +1200 > Chris Packham wrote: > > > erasesize is meaningful for flash devices but for SRAM there is no > > concept of an erase block so erasesize is set to 0. When partitioning > > these devices instead

Re: [PATCH v6] mtd: handle partitioning on devices with 0 erasesize

2017-06-09 Thread Boris Brezillon
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 15:58:31 +1200 Chris Packham wrote: > erasesize is meaningful for flash devices but for SRAM there is no > concept of an erase block so erasesize is set to 0. When partitioning > these devices instead of ensuring partitions fall on erasesize > boundaries we ensure they fall on

Re: [PATCH v6] mtd: handle partitioning on devices with 0 erasesize

2017-06-09 Thread Brian Norris
Thanks Chris! On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 03:58:31PM +1200, Chris Packham wrote: > erasesize is meaningful for flash devices but for SRAM there is no > concept of an erase block so erasesize is set to 0. When partitioning > these devices instead of ensuring partitions fall on erasesize > boundaries we

[PATCH v6] mtd: handle partitioning on devices with 0 erasesize

2017-06-08 Thread Chris Packham
erasesize is meaningful for flash devices but for SRAM there is no concept of an erase block so erasesize is set to 0. When partitioning these devices instead of ensuring partitions fall on erasesize boundaries we ensure they fall on writesize boundaries. Helped-by: Boris Brezillon Signed-off-by: