Russell,

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:

No, because you haven't taken the time to think and consider my
reply, which gives you insight into how your "problem" is no
different from the situation that everyone else has, where it
isn't a problem.

I have certainly considered it.

I think the "problem" here is that you've got used to coreboot
doing something that very few other boot loaders do, namely it
automatically extracting a rootfs UUID for you.  The rest of the
world doesn't have that luxury.

Earlier in this thread Rob nicely proposed a solution to my TFTP.  I
agreed that was a nice solution.  I can certainly use it.  Certainly
there are many places where UUIDs are awesome.  ...but that's still no
reason to assign a random number when a sane and logical numbering
system exists for MMC parts on a given SoC.

So, instead, you want to stuff more code into the kernel to work
around what you think is a problem - a problem which seems to be
unique to yourself.

Not so much.  I think many people have expressed interest in something
like this.  It seems unlikely to be unique.

The UUID and label solutions were created by x86 people to work
around exactly this dynamic device problem, and as my previous
replies have shown, it is superior to fixing the device assignment
as you're trying to do.

Sure.  They don't have the luxury of having a simple and consistent
numbering so they're forced to use UUIDs for booting and have the
extra mental work of mapping IDs to physical hardware.  ...so they're
forced to use UUIDs.

However, I don't expect that you'll like this answer, and you'll
probably just re-post your same question after each and every
paragraph rather than considering whether the already existing
solutions could solve your "problem".  So I'm just wasting my time.

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.

This is my last reply.

Excellent.  I look forward to your silence.

-Doug