Re: does drive_get_next(IF_NONE) make sense?

[Markus Armbruster]

Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:

> On Fri, 12 Nov 2021 at 13:34, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>> > On 03/11/2021 09.41, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> >> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
>> >>
>> >>> Does it make sense for a device/board to do drive_get_next(IF_NONE) ?
>> >> Short answer: hell, no!  ;)
>> >
>> > Would it make sense to add an "assert(type != IF_NONE)" to drive_get()
>> > to avoid such mistakes in the future?
>>
>> Worth a try.
>
> You need to fix the sifive_u_otp device first :-)

And for that, we may want Hao Wu's "[PATCH v4 5/7] blockdev: Add a new
IF type IF_OTHER" first.