From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 11:48:50 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 23/25] sunxi: Use mmc_bootdev=2 for MMC2 boot In-Reply-To: <20180716081956.32434-24-jagan@amarulasolutions.com> References: <20180716081956.32434-1-jagan@amarulasolutions.com> <20180716081956.32434-24-jagan@amarulasolutions.com> Message-ID: <20180716094850.ox3uqkzw65k5f6sg@flea.home> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 01:49:54PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > With DM_MMC the mmc devices are probed as per dt status > and eMMC can probed maximum device of 2, if all nodes like > mmc0, mmc1 and mmc2 status are 'okay'. > > So update mmc_bootdev to 2 and add boot order as 2, 1, 0 > devices. so-that it can to boot any identified device even > if the respective device status disabled or unsupported. > > Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki > --- > board/sunxi/board.c | 2 +- > include/configs/sunxi-common.h | 4 +++- > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/board/sunxi/board.c b/board/sunxi/board.c > index 5ed1b8bae1..7edc468185 100644 > --- a/board/sunxi/board.c > +++ b/board/sunxi/board.c > @@ -768,7 +768,7 @@ int misc_init_r(void) > } else if (boot == BOOT_DEVICE_MMC1) { > env_set("mmc_bootdev", "0"); > } else if (boot == BOOT_DEVICE_MMC2) { > - env_set("mmc_bootdev", "1"); > + env_set("mmc_bootdev", "2"); Isn't that broken too? I guess we should return MMC3 in that case. Also, what about bisectability? Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: