lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/4] Patches to allow consistent mmc / mmcblk numbering w/ device tree
    On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 04:05:14PM +0100, Stefan Agner wrote:
    > On 16.03.2019 16:39, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
    > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 01:33:58PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
    > >> If you have a FS or partition table there, it does.
    > >> If you don't, I agree ... that's a problem.
    > >
    > > eMMC boot partitions are called mmcblkXbootY, and unless you have more
    > > than one eMMC device on the system, they can be found either by looking
    > > for /dev/mmcblk*boot* or by querying udev. The advantage of using udev
    > > is you can discover the physical device behind it by looking at DEVPATH,
    > > ID_PATH, etc, but you may not have that installed on an embedded device.
    > >
    > > However, as I say, just looking for /dev/mmcblk*boot* is sufficient to
    > > find the eMMC boot partitions where there is just one eMMC device
    > > present (which seems to be the standard setup.)
    > >
    > >> > I don't care the slightest what the numbering is, as long as it is
    > >> > stable. On some hardware, with an unpatched kernel, the mmc device
    > >> > numbering changes depending on whether or not an SD card is inserted on
    > >> > boot. Getting rid of that behaviour is really all I want.
    > >>
    > >> Agreed, that would be an improvement.
    > >
    > > The mmc device numbering was tied to the mmc host numbering a while back
    > > and the order that the hosts are probed should be completely independent
    > > of whether a card is inserted or not:
    > >
    > > snprintf(md->disk->disk_name, sizeof(md->disk->disk_name),
    > > "mmcblk%u%s", card->host->index, subname ? subname : "");
    > >
    > > snprintf(rpmb_name, sizeof(rpmb_name),
    > > "mmcblk%u%s", card->host->index, subname ? subname : "");
    > >
    > > I suspect that Mans is quoting something from the dim and distant past
    > > to confuse the issue - as shown above, it is now dependent on the host
    > > numbering order not the order in which cards are inserted.
    >
    > Commit 9aaf3437aa72 ("mmc: block: Use the mmc host device index as the
    > mmcblk device index") which came in with v4.6 enables constant mmc block
    > device numbering. I can confirm that it works nicely, and it improved
    > the situation a lot.
    >
    > That being said, we still use a patch downstream which allows
    > renumbering using an alias. We deal with a bunch of different boards
    > with different SoC's. I have a couple of SD cards with various rootfs
    > and use internal eMMC boot quite often as well. Remembering which board
    > uses which numbering is a pain. Maintaining a patch is just easier...
    > Furthermore, U-Boot allows reordering and all boards I deal with use mmc
    > 0 for the internal eMMC. The aliases allow consistency.

    Maybe eMMC should've been given a different block device name?

    --
    RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
    FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
    According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-03-17 16:45    [W:4.725 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site