[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Tom Rini]

Upon further inspection and review and chatting with kernel folks, what
happens here is that what mmcblk# a device gets is based on probe order.
So a system with an SD card inserted with place eMMC on mmcblk1, but
without an SD card, it will be on mmcblk0.  So U-boot can only provide a
best guess.  In this case, if no SD card is present, we would want to
pass mmcblk0p2 still.  If an SD card is present, it woudl be able to
provide a uEnv.txt that would be loaded (even if the kernel is NOT
there) which can still update mmcroot variable.

This reverts commit 827512fb1154c05c6eb1e2259e936df55c98a535.

Cc: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
---
 include/configs/am335x_evm.h |    1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/configs/am335x_evm.h b/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
index e8e5275..f746e48 100644
--- a/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
+++ b/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
@@ -171,7 +171,6 @@
 	"run mmcboot;" \
 	"setenv mmcdev 1; " \
 	"setenv bootpart 1:2; " \
-	"setenv mmcroot /dev/mmcblk1p2 ro; " \
 	"run mmcboot;" \
 	"run nandboot;"
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:

> Upon further inspection and review and chatting with kernel folks, what
> happens here is that what mmcblk# a device gets is based on probe order.
> So a system with an SD card inserted with place eMMC on mmcblk1, but
> without an SD card, it will be on mmcblk0.  So U-boot can only provide a
> best guess.  In this case, if no SD card is present, we would want to
> pass mmcblk0p2 still.  If an SD card is present, it woudl be able to
> provide a uEnv.txt that would be loaded (even if the kernel is NOT
> there) which can still update mmcroot variable.
>
> This reverts commit 827512fb1154c05c6eb1e2259e936df55c98a535.
>
> Cc: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> ---
>  include/configs/am335x_evm.h |    1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/configs/am335x_evm.h b/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
> index e8e5275..f746e48 100644
> --- a/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
> +++ b/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
> @@ -171,7 +171,6 @@
>  	"run mmcboot;" \
>  	"setenv mmcdev 1; " \
>  	"setenv bootpart 1:2; " \
> -	"setenv mmcroot /dev/mmcblk1p2 ro; " \
>  	"run mmcboot;" \
>  	"run nandboot;"
>
> --
> 1.7.9.5

  are you sure about this? note that, in the above, you've *already*
tried to mmcboot off of device mmcblk0 and, for one reason or another,
that failed. so u-boot then *explicitly* switches to mmc dev 1 with:

  setenv mmcdev 1
  setenv bootpart 1:2

why would it not make sense to also switch mmcroot there as well?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Tom Rini]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/08/2013 11:34 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:
> 
>> Upon further inspection and review and chatting with kernel folks, what
>> happens here is that what mmcblk# a device gets is based on probe order.
>> So a system with an SD card inserted with place eMMC on mmcblk1, but
>> without an SD card, it will be on mmcblk0.  So U-boot can only provide a
>> best guess.  In this case, if no SD card is present, we would want to
>> pass mmcblk0p2 still.  If an SD card is present, it woudl be able to
>> provide a uEnv.txt that would be loaded (even if the kernel is NOT
>> there) which can still update mmcroot variable.
>>
>> This reverts commit 827512fb1154c05c6eb1e2259e936df55c98a535.
>>
>> Cc: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
>> ---
>>  include/configs/am335x_evm.h |    1 -
>>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/configs/am335x_evm.h b/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
>> index e8e5275..f746e48 100644
>> --- a/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
>> +++ b/include/configs/am335x_evm.h
>> @@ -171,7 +171,6 @@
>>  	"run mmcboot;" \
>>  	"setenv mmcdev 1; " \
>>  	"setenv bootpart 1:2; " \
>> -	"setenv mmcroot /dev/mmcblk1p2 ro; " \
>>  	"run mmcboot;" \
>>  	"run nandboot;"
>>
>> --
>> 1.7.9.5
> 
>   are you sure about this? note that, in the above, you've *already*
> tried to mmcboot off of device mmcblk0 and, for one reason or another,
> that failed. so u-boot then *explicitly* switches to mmc dev 1 with:
> 
>   setenv mmcdev 1
>   setenv bootpart 1:2
> 
> why would it not make sense to also switch mmcroot there as well?

Yes, I'm very sure after talking with the kernel folks and playing with
a tree with all of the EDMA stuff fixed up so we can use modern kernels
again.  But you can see this on the vendor kernel BBB ships with too.
If you have an SD card and eMMC, SD card will be mmcblk0 and eMMC
mmcblk1.  If you however just root from eMMC, it will become mmcblk0.
The only time you have mmcblk1 is when you have both SD card inserted
and eMMC present.

Note that omap5 uevm has a different issue I shall be posting a patch
for soon, need to get the board back into my setup.

- -- 
Tom
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=/UqY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Tom Rini]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 11:12:32AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:

> Upon further inspection and review and chatting with kernel folks, what
> happens here is that what mmcblk# a device gets is based on probe order.
> So a system with an SD card inserted with place eMMC on mmcblk1, but
> without an SD card, it will be on mmcblk0.  So U-boot can only provide a
> best guess.  In this case, if no SD card is present, we would want to
> pass mmcblk0p2 still.  If an SD card is present, it woudl be able to
> provide a uEnv.txt that would be loaded (even if the kernel is NOT
> there) which can still update mmcroot variable.
> 
> This reverts commit 827512fb1154c05c6eb1e2259e936df55c98a535.
> 
> Cc: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>

Applied to u-boot/master.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20131008/ad58f2a1/attachment.pgp>

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:

... snip ...

> Applied to u-boot/master.

  dumb question but what does it mean to say "Applied to
u-boot/master" when it clearly has not been applied to master? i can
see posts like that, but doing a "git pull" produces nothing. i am on
the u-boot mainline, and the "master" branch, so what am i
misunderstanding? thanks.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Robert Nelson]

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> ... snip ...
>
>> Applied to u-boot/master.
>
>   dumb question but what does it mean to say "Applied to
> u-boot/master" when it clearly has not been applied to master? i can
> see posts like that, but doing a "git pull" produces nothing. i am on
> the u-boot mainline, and the "master" branch, so what am i
> misunderstanding? thanks.

The public git/http server is only synced every 6hours...

Regards,

-- 
Robert Nelson
http://www.rcn-ee.com/

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Robert Nelson wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:
> >
> > ... snip ...
> >
> >> Applied to u-boot/master.
> >
> >   dumb question but what does it mean to say "Applied to
> > u-boot/master" when it clearly has not been applied to master? i can
> > see posts like that, but doing a "git pull" produces nothing. i am on
> > the u-boot mainline, and the "master" branch, so what am i
> > misunderstanding? thanks.
>
> The public git/http server is only synced every 6hours...

  i'm not convinced. i'm looking at this posting from yesterday:

http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-October/164517.html

timestamped "Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:02:08PM +0200" which contains a
change i'm interested in and, as of this minute, it doesn't appear in
master.

rday

-- 

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Tom Rini]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 05:28:23PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Robert Nelson wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:
> > >
> > > ... snip ...
> > >
> > >> Applied to u-boot/master.
> > >
> > >   dumb question but what does it mean to say "Applied to
> > > u-boot/master" when it clearly has not been applied to master? i can
> > > see posts like that, but doing a "git pull" produces nothing. i am on
> > > the u-boot mainline, and the "master" branch, so what am i
> > > misunderstanding? thanks.
> >
> > The public git/http server is only synced every 6hours...
> 
>   i'm not convinced. i'm looking at this posting from yesterday:
> 
> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-October/164517.html
> 
> timestamped "Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:02:08PM +0200" which contains a
> change i'm interested in and, as of this minute, it doesn't appear in
> master.

That's when Albert sent his email.  My reply is "Tue Oct 8 21:33:30 CEST
2013", so yes, we haven't hit the re-sync window just  yet.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20131008/1f7a5160/attachment.pgp>

[U-Boot] [PATCH] Revert "am335x_evm.h: If mmcdev and bootpart switch to mmcdev 1, so should mmcroot."

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 05:28:23PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Robert Nelson wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ... snip ...
> > > >
> > > >> Applied to u-boot/master.
> > > >
> > > >   dumb question but what does it mean to say "Applied to
> > > > u-boot/master" when it clearly has not been applied to master? i can
> > > > see posts like that, but doing a "git pull" produces nothing. i am on
> > > > the u-boot mainline, and the "master" branch, so what am i
> > > > misunderstanding? thanks.
> > >
> > > The public git/http server is only synced every 6hours...
> >
> >   i'm not convinced. i'm looking at this posting from yesterday:
> >
> > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-October/164517.html
> >
> > timestamped "Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:02:08PM +0200" which contains a
> > change i'm interested in and, as of this minute, it doesn't appear in
> > master.
>
> That's when Albert sent his email.  My reply is "Tue Oct 8 21:33:30 CEST
> 2013", so yes, we haven't hit the re-sync window just  yet.

  ah, got it.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================