Hi Mikhail, On 1/19/26 1:36 AM, Mikhail Kshevetskiy wrote:
mtdpart internally enumerate partitions starting from zero, but partition driver API enumerate partitions starting from 1. Just now mtdpart does not take this difference into account. This is wrong.
This possibly will break a few boards which may be relying on the wrong offset being used. Since it was wrong (according to the doc in include/part.h which states the partition number 1 is the first), I guess it's "fine" to break those?
Unnecessary debug message also was removed. Fixes: c29a6daec184 ("disk: support MTD partitions") Signed-off-by: Mikhail Kshevetskiy <[email protected]> --- drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c index 842d3e7274e..0bd4b3db022 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c @@ -1067,7 +1067,6 @@ static struct mtd_info *mtd_get_partition_by_index(struct mtd_info *mtd, int ind if (i++ == index) return part;- debug("Partition with idx=%d not found on MTD device %s\n", index, mtd->name);return NULL; }@@ -1082,9 +1081,11 @@ static int __maybe_unused part_get_info_mtd(struct blk_desc *dev_desc, int part_return -EINVAL; }- part = mtd_get_partition_by_index(master, part_idx);+ /* internal indexing starts from zero, but part_idx starts from 1 */ + part = mtd_get_partition_by_index(master, part_idx - 1); if (!part) { - debug("Failed to find partition with idx=%d\n", part_idx); + debug("Failed to find partition with idx=%d on MTD device %s\n", + part_idx - 1, master->name);
I think it'd make more sense to patch mtd_get_partition_by_index() to start with i = 1 instead of i = 0, because if we ever get another user of this function, then we don't need to go through the same trick that is implemented in this patch for part_get_info_mtd(). What do you think?
Cheers, Quentin
