From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A98C2D0A3 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:55:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F082422280 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:55:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="PyFTLk7u" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org F082422280 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sntech.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date: Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=B4TbMtA/Y3bPW6b3OcIn96OB9N1Do2Vt/aryqmrYExE=; b=PyFTLk7uUQ4FttZvF/CvcFz0f jLvsxly+Fbpo1AZL4PNyYtgJIN+yLfcll0yG03sjaPiSf1sxJ5F9wWwrMSaw+7hH1kqZI3FAEy7oq g6nmSWXAdoR6VZrPHWoWzx7Q25jtjbt3QHeTku+1XSY+VLjoiAr8krGyZy/oePc7+Cy4akaV8M1SQ GAKtWG7p44y3g9jmhXlp0QZTbx3nYF532GlFa3fSemhWtS9VpW5wgK04t8cRySZ4WBSsrj8QEq9fM NIapFLAUkef2APF5vtau8y1JwxiOeulVrMNzTgjAZO8srzuCjERtO8Ob2qz4tS2m7E5H2pSPm8ZWM C/fi+Gcww==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kaL7s-0006Id-SN; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 15:55:08 +0000 Received: from gloria.sntech.de ([185.11.138.130]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kaL7U-00065O-Js; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 15:54:46 +0000 Received: from ip5f5aa64a.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([95.90.166.74] helo=diego.localnet) by gloria.sntech.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kaL7K-0000Fl-3J; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 16:54:34 +0100 From: Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= To: Doug Anderson Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Assign a fixed index to mmc devices on rk3399-roc-pc boards. Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 16:54:33 +0100 Message-ID: <10029979.JCShpOL5JR@diego> In-Reply-To: References: <20201104094950.2096-1-m.reichl@fivetechno.de> <4984701.vSXMUKeAfh@diego> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201104_105445_177276_DE43D6BA X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 29.09 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Rob Herring , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , Liam Girdwood , Rob Herring , LKML , Markus Reichl , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , Mark Brown , Linux ARM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2020, 16:42:01 CET schrieb Doug Anderson: > Hi, > = > On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 2:51 AM Heiko St=FCbner wrote: > > > > 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 fr= om [1]. > > > > > > [1] > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11747669/ > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Markus Reichl > > > --- > > > 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/a= rm64/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 =3D "Firefly ROC-RK3399-PC Board"; > > > compatible =3D "firefly,roc-rk3399-pc", "rockchip,rk3399"; > > > > > > + aliases { > > > + mmc0 =3D &sdmmc; > > > + mmc1 =3D &sdhci; > > > + }; > > > + > > > > Any reason for this odering? > > > > 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, s= dio. > > > > And I guess a further question would be when we're doing arbitary order= ings > > anyway, why is this not in rk3399.dtsi ;-) ? > = > Though I personally like the idea of eMMC, which is typically > built-in, as being the "0" number, I'm personally happy with any > numbering scheme that's consistent. Ordering them by base address is > OK w/ me and seems less controversial. That seems like it could go in > rk3399.dtsi and then if a particular board wanted a different order > they could override it in their board file. = Yep that sounds sensible and ordering by base address at least is one "simple" type of order without too much explanation needed. So I guess we'd get a sdio + sdmmc + sdhci ordering @Markus: if nobody else complains, can you do a "simple" rk3399.dtsi change with that please? > The downside of putting > in rk3399 is that boards that don't have all SD/MMC interfaces enabled > would definitely get a new number compared to old kernels, but > hopefully this is the last time? With that new asynchronous mmc-probe-thingy in 5.10 that "caused" this, it sounds like everything gets a new number anyway ;-) . Heiko _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel