Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Assign a fixed index to mmc devices on rk3399-roc-pc boards. | From | Markus Reichl <> | Date | Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:15:58 +0100 |
| |
Hi Heiko,
Am 04.11.20 um 11:51 schrieb Heiko Stübner: > Hi Markus, > > Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2020, 10:49:45 CET schrieb Markus Reichl: >> Recently introduced async probe on mmc devices can shuffle block IDs. >> Pin them to fixed values to ease booting in evironments where UUIDs >> are not practical. Use newly introduced aliases for mmcblk devices from [1]. >> >> [1] >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11747669/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Reichl <m.reichl@fivetechno.de> >> --- >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-roc-pc.dtsi | 5 +++++ >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-roc-pc.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-roc-pc.dtsi >> index e7a459fa4322..bc9482b59428 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-roc-pc.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-roc-pc.dtsi >> @@ -13,6 +13,11 @@ / { >> model = "Firefly ROC-RK3399-PC Board"; >> compatible = "firefly,roc-rk3399-pc", "rockchip,rk3399"; >> >> + aliases { >> + mmc0 = &sdmmc; >> + mmc1 = &sdhci; >> + }; >> + > > Any reason for this odering?
Without pinning roc-pc mostly booted as mmcblk0 = sdmmc = µSD mmcblk1 = sdhci = eMMC so I kept this behaviour in aliases
roc-pc-mezzanine with populated SDIO-M2-slot booted mmc0 = sdio = (no mmcblk) mmcblk1 = sdmmc = µSD mmcblk2 = sdhci = eMMC
With my aliases both boards behave the same now and the optional SDIO slot goes out of the way to mmc2.
> > I.e. some previous incarnations had it ordered as (emmc, mmc, sdio). > This is also true for the ChromeOS out-of-tree usage of those, the > rk3399 dts in the chromeos-4.4 tree also orders this as sdhci, sdmmc, sdio.
The boards from my zoo (exynos, rk3399) mostly come up with SD-card as mmc0 and eMMC as mmc1 in mainline as opposed in some vendor kernels. but I have no objection to set it the other way round if this is more common with rk3399 boards.
> > And I guess a further question would be when we're doing arbitary orderings > anyway, why is this not in rk3399.dtsi ;-) ?
I restricted the ordering to the boards I have, not to confuse other established use cases, but if a standard ordering is desired this can go to rk3399.dtsi.
> > > Heiko > >
Gruß, -- Markus Reichl
| |