On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 10:09:45AM +0200, Michael Walle wrote: > Am 2021-09-15 02:17, schrieb Vladimir Oltean: > > On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 06:45:56PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote: > > > The linux device tree hasn't set this property. To be similarly we > > > remove > > > > s/similarly/similar/ > > > > > it from the u-boot device tree, too. The second controller of the > > > LS1028A has indeed no card detect pin. > > > > Because it is an eMMC controller. > > > > > The present state register of the > > > second controller will always report the card as present. Thus, there > > > should be no functional change otherwise than one more register access > > > to read the present state. > > > > Tested? > > Yes, I've tested the eMMC (and actually using it this way). I also > manually read out the register value and made sure the card detect > bit is set. > > > > The property should still be introduced in > > > the linux device tree. > > > > How do you feel about dropping this patch? > > If I drop this patch, I'll either have to (1) keep this property > the device tree sync patch too or (2) it will be removed without a > comment in that patch. > > I presume you prefer (1), but as I said, I'd keep the device trees > between linux and u-boot the same and keep it simple by just copying > the files. So yes, I'd like to keep this patch as the point of this > patch is to give an explanation why this property is removed (until > it might or might not be introduced in the kernel device tree; in > fact I thought I had send a patch to the LKML but I must have > forgotten it). > > I was thinking of putting it into the -u-boot.dtsi, but as there > is no breakage, I didn't.
Ok, but we should still put "non-removable" in the Linux dtsi soon then.