From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@blackshift.org>
Cc: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
devicetree-spec@vger.kernel.org, quentin.schulz@cherry.de,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SoC-specific device tree aliases?
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2025 12:24:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cbf203b8-28a9-48be-bd87-29eb0d6656ab@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251203-adorable-gila-monster-3d313a-mkl@blackshift.org>
On 03/12/2025 12:20, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 03.12.2025 11:25:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 03/12/2025 11:16, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>>> Hello Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> On 11/17/25 5:29 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 17/11/2025 17:06, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>>>> So you want it to be an ABI for barebox, sure, just make it a binding.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you have in mind? Other than standard names for the aliases,
>>>>> what can we check here? That a specific alias points to a specific
>>>>> path? That would be a bit too much IMO. That would be equivalent to
>>>>> specifying possible values in 'reg' for all devices.
>>>>
>>>> Binding with pattern or list of needed alias names, referenced by given
>>>> soc-platform top-level schema.
>>>>
>>>> One of the points is to make it explicit and obvious (e.g. to Arnd or to
>>>> me if I forget, because I follow the same logic of aliases per board)
>>>> that these aliases are used outside of kernel.
>>>>
>>>> Just because ufs/mmc/spi can be used that way, does not mean we should
>>>> accept any possible alias into soc.dtsi.
>>>
>>> I can't see how this could work. A number of boards renumber MMC devices
>>> in a different manner than the SoC reference manual:
>>>
>>> - Changing the alias numbering is an ABI break, because Linux derives
>>> its /dev/mmcblkX numbering from it
>>
>> First, why the alias would change? Isn't the board following the SoC
>> numbering in 99.9% cases?
>>
>> Second, I don't think it is an ABI. We had it ~5 or ~8 years ago where
>> the mmcblkX was changing based on probe ordering. Many people setups got
>> broken, many people complained and the consensus reply was: please start
>> finally using UUID/PARTUIID/LABEL for rootfs. Eventually we got back to
>> mmcblkX stability but rule is there - if your cmdline has /dev/mmcblkX,
>> then it is your problem.
>
> In order to use UUID/PARTUIID/LABEL in the kernel command line, the
> firmware/bootloader/... has to map from the register value to the
> instance to read the UUID/PARTUIID/LABEL from the media.
Or have it stored when flashing/configuring the board as part of
firmware configuration like U-Boot env.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-03 11:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-13 8:28 SoC-specific device tree aliases? Ahmad Fatoum
2025-11-13 18:04 ` Rob Herring
2025-11-13 19:17 ` Doug Anderson
2025-11-13 20:24 ` Heiko Stübner
2025-11-14 9:13 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-11-17 7:38 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-11-17 8:26 ` Sascha Hauer
2025-11-17 9:52 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-11-17 10:34 ` Sascha Hauer
2025-11-17 10:41 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-11-17 12:56 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2025-11-17 13:18 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-11-17 14:52 ` Sascha Hauer
2025-11-17 14:57 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-11-17 15:23 ` Sascha Hauer
2025-11-17 15:44 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-11-17 16:06 ` Rob Herring
2025-11-17 16:29 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-12-03 10:16 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-12-03 10:25 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-12-03 10:36 ` Matthias Schiffer
2025-12-03 11:08 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-12-03 11:37 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-12-03 17:51 ` Rob Herring
2025-12-04 7:59 ` Sascha Hauer
2025-12-04 13:44 ` Rob Herring
2025-12-03 11:20 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2025-12-03 11:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
2025-12-03 11:34 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-12-04 18:51 ` Tom Rini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=cbf203b8-28a9-48be-bd87-29eb0d6656ab@kernel.org \
--to=krzk@kernel.org \
--cc=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree-spec@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@blackshift.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=quentin.schulz@cherry.de \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox