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 Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD85CC4321E for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 11:30:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E3388554C; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:30:38 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=mailserver.it header.i=@mailserver.it header.b="g/WRje8f"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 4278E85541; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:30:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out-12.comm2000.it (smtp-out-12.comm2000.it [212.97.32.82]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F341085591 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:30:19 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=francesco@dolcini.it Received: from francesco-nb.int.toradex.com (31-10-206-125.static.upc.ch [31.10.206.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: francesco@dolcini.it) by smtp-out-12.comm2000.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 523F6BA1E14; Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:30:18 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mailserver.it; s=mailsrv; t=1670239818; bh=Kq+5kUwgPfTpYZtS89P4d7VkQaEGPlQnylqnIFbeT74=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=g/WRje8fj6jvfHuYkT8TUDWTt85/46AhNKmeCUp8nZyEtUvtKV5018Aumnm61Iv6F 4ZdTgwqueynN39EvnMzDOaDU+UvhCd5ENg5dhJKSWysFf0/OrLZkoFcEoxzv6R4NKP /tJ9SA63VGqELBmJ3M8/mRF3pHKbtEQlgqK4RikgS+JvwuYZaUDx5sSmTtbLdZhKil bbUAUhg6SyKGDLkS81DNPpNQc52uzJE0otpXUjSdXf7vt04Y98Sd5RlMDu8wGXD1Yy +hRORK7IwWExhHGCbI2RrNIue/sQhH8i5GzS9BIJjthj1FkgeLqWKfBO+p/rCCEOSC hyfYTxSo49gaw== Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 12:30:16 +0100 From: Francesco Dolcini To: Miquel Raynal , Marek Vasut Cc: Francesco Dolcini , Richard Weinberger , Vignesh Raghavendra , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Francesco Dolcini , Shawn Guo , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mtd: parsers: ofpart: Fix parsing when size-cells is 0 Message-ID: References: <20221202115327.4475d3a2@xps-13> <20221202150556.14c5ae43@xps-13> <2b6fc52d-60b9-d0f4-ab91-4cf7a8095999@denx.de> <20221202160030.1b8d0b8a@xps-13> <223b7a4e-3aff-8070-7387-c77d2ded1dd6@denx.de> <20221202164904.08d750df@xps-13> <0503c46d-c385-74f5-f762-51d87a5ebaff@denx.de> <20221202174255.2c1cb2ff@xps-13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.6 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Hello Miquel On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 06:20:02PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 05:42:55PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > Please also do it with the NAND chip described. If, when the NAND chip > > is described U-Boot tries to create partitions in the controller node, > > then the situation is even worse than I thought. But I believe > > It's like that for U-Boot older than v2022.04 ... and IMO we cannot > ignore it. > > Said that from the code U-Boot looks into a `partition{}` node only as a > direct child of the nand-controller, if there is a nand-chip in between > the nand-controller{} and the partitions{} it will just ignore it. > > I could try to see what it is doing exactly, but I would need a little > bit more time, I just tried changing the DTS as wrote I got a non > bootable system. If I have a nand-chip { partitions {} } described in the dts U-Boot (even the latest one) ignores it and generates the partition as child of the nand controller, the linux parser however see that partitions{} exists, even if empty, and ignore the partition directly defined as child of the nand controller. TL;DR: parser fails and boot fails according to that. Francesco