El Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 05:15:51PM +0200, Quentin Schulz deia: > From: Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@theobroma-systems.com> > > On RK3399, mmc0 is eMMC and mmc1 is SD card, c.f. console: > MMC: mmc@fe320000: 1, mmc@fe330000: 0 > > In arch/arm/mach-rockchip/spl-boot-order.c:board_boot_order, the > boot_device (BOOT_DEVICE_*) value is gotten from spl_node_to_boot_device > function. Said function returns BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1 for mmc0 (eMMC) and > BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2 for mmc1 (SD card). > > Since the SD card controller is at mmc@fe320000, it should be associated > with BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2 and not BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1. Same applies to eMMC. > > Let's fix that by swapping the two BOOT_DEVICEs. > > Cc: Quentin Schulz <foss+ub...@0leil.net> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@theobroma-systems.com>
There's a thread here on what the proper naming would be https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2022-July/489155.html I agree it's not been consistent, and I'd do it like in this patch, but I don't feel strongly about any option nor pretend to stop any discussion. Tested on a Rock-Pi-4B and didn't see any regression. Tested-by: Xavier Drudis Ferran <xdru...@tinet.cat> > --- > arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3399/rk3399.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3399/rk3399.c > b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3399/rk3399.c > index 691d69dc59..f280cb1dbf 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3399/rk3399.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3399/rk3399.c > @@ -180,8 +180,8 @@ const char *spl_decode_boot_device(u32 boot_device) > u32 boot_device; > const char *ofpath; > } spl_boot_devices_tbl[] = { > - { BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1, "/mmc@fe320000" }, > - { BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2, "/mmc@fe330000" }, > + { BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2, "/mmc@fe320000" }, > + { BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1, "/mmc@fe330000" }, > { BOOT_DEVICE_SPI, "/spi@ff1d0000" }, > }; > > -- > 2.36.1 >
