| Message ID | 20181205022500.5878-1-kever.yang@rock-chips.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Philipp Tomsich |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [U-Boot,v2] rockchip: rk3288-evb: dts: remove 'vmmc' from emmc node | expand |
+Tom > On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: > > The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip > SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on > (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, > so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. > > This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is > broken. If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. > The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference > schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to > boot into next stage. Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. I am willing to move ahead with these and simply merge them, if either Tom or Simon agree that they are fine with a DTS that describes one board and is then used for incompatible (if they were compatible, this change wasn’t needed) boards... > Signed-off-by: Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> Reviewed-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> > --- > > Changes in v2: > - only update for rk3288-evb, remove change for other boards. > > arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi > index ce75bd5d28..04902c0bd3 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi > @@ -150,8 +150,6 @@ > num-slots = <1>; > pinctrl-names = "default"; > pinctrl-0 = <&emmc_clk>, <&emmc_cmd>, <&emmc_pwr>, <&emmc_bus8>; > - vmmc-supply = <&vcc_io>; > - vqmmc-supply = <&vcc_flash>; > status = "okay"; > }; > > -- > 2.18.0 >
Hi Philipp, On 12/06/2018 09:50 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote: > +Tom > >> On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >> >> The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip >> SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on >> (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, >> so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. >> >> This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is >> broken. > If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. > I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. > >> The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference >> schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to >> boot into next stage. > Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and > I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. Not sure if you have read my previous mail for answer all your comments, I do agree DTS should represent the hardware, but please note that the DTS is no kind of standard, and people always choose what they need and add those part in there dts, but not always add all the property and everyone use the same model. I would say there are many boards does not have this 'vmmc-supply' in there emmc node. There are many dts properties only available in U-Boot, and many dts properties only available in kernel, and I'm very sure the properity 'vmmc-supply' in rockchip evbs is not need, the emmc can works very good with default pmic config. A remove of this property does not trying to describe something not belong to this board, but only ignore something that not important or even redundant. Only eMMC driver is the one must work in a bootloader, and it should boot into next stage even all other drivers can not work. Rockchip can not upstream all the board dts from different customers, and I believe there are much much more boards with different vendor's SoCs, we should care a little more about the robust of the bootloader. Rockchip private U-Boot is trying to use one dts per SoC instead of one dts per board, and if the basic driver(timer, mmc) works, we can boot into kernel in emmc, the pmic/clock is to make it faster, and all other feature, like led, display, key, usb gadget, are plus to the basic function, and we always make basic function works. Thanks, - Kever > > I am willing to move ahead with these and simply merge them, if either Tom or > Simon agree that they are fine with a DTS that describes one board and is then > used for incompatible (if they were compatible, this change wasn’t needed) > boards... > >> Signed-off-by: Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> > Reviewed-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com> > >> --- >> >> Changes in v2: >> - only update for rk3288-evb, remove change for other boards. >> >> arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi | 2 -- >> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi >> index ce75bd5d28..04902c0bd3 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi >> @@ -150,8 +150,6 @@ >> num-slots = <1>; >> pinctrl-names = "default"; >> pinctrl-0 = <&emmc_clk>, <&emmc_cmd>, <&emmc_pwr>, <&emmc_bus8>; >> - vmmc-supply = <&vcc_io>; >> - vqmmc-supply = <&vcc_flash>; >> status = "okay"; >> }; >> >> -- >> 2.18.0 >> >
Kever, > On 07.12.2018, at 02:39, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: > > Hi Philipp, > > On 12/06/2018 09:50 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> +Tom >> >>> On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>> >>> The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip >>> SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on >>> (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, >>> so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. >>> >>> This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is >>> broken. >> If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. >> I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. >> >>> The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference >>> schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to >>> boot into next stage. >> Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and >> I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. > > Not sure if you have read my previous mail for answer all your comments, > > I do agree DTS should represent the hardware, but please note that the DTS > is no kind of standard, and people always choose what they need and add > those part in there dts, but not always add all the property and > everyone use the same model. I would say there are many boards does not have this > 'vmmc-supply’ in there emmc node. That is exactly the reason why I bumped the decision up the stairs (to Tom and/or Simon): what you are saying makes sense to me (viewed through your eyes and from your specific usecase), but it directly contradicts how the DTS usage is intended. In other words: Tom (as the top-level decision maker) or Simon (who owns the device-model and therefore will also have an opinion on DTS usage) should make the final call. Thanks, Philipp.
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:24:22PM +0100, Philipp Tomsich wrote: > Kever, > > > On 07.12.2018, at 02:39, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Philipp, > > > > On 12/06/2018 09:50 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >> +Tom > >> > >>> On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip > >>> SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on > >>> (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, > >>> so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. > >>> > >>> This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is > >>> broken. > >> If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. > >> I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. > >> > >>> The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference > >>> schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to > >>> boot into next stage. > >> Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and > >> I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. > > > > Not sure if you have read my previous mail for answer all your comments, > > > > I do agree DTS should represent the hardware, but please note that the DTS > > is no kind of standard, and people always choose what they need and add > > those part in there dts, but not always add all the property and > > everyone use the same model. I would say there are many boards does not have this > > 'vmmc-supply’ in there emmc node. > > That is exactly the reason why I bumped the decision up the stairs (to Tom and/or > Simon): what you are saying makes sense to me (viewed through your eyes and > from your specific usecase), but it directly contradicts how the DTS usage is intended. > > In other words: Tom (as the top-level decision maker) or Simon (who owns the > device-model and therefore will also have an opinion on DTS usage) should make > the final call. My answer is that I would strongly suspect that over in linux "we have N different close-enough boards using this one DTS" isn't acceptable. You make a dtsi and include it from the board and things that aren't common don't go into the dtsi. And yes, when starting off everyone (myself included) copies the reference platform dts and then changes it as needed, and sometimes misses a thing or two. But no, I don't think we want a wrong dts and I'm pretty sure the kernel really wouldn't want wrong dts files and the general goal is that excluding the -u-boot.dtsi files, ours are copies of the kernel.
Hi Tom, On 12/07/2018 10:13 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:24:22PM +0100, Philipp Tomsich wrote: >> Kever, >> >>> On 07.12.2018, at 02:39, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Philipp, >>> >>> On 12/06/2018 09:50 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> +Tom >>>> >>>>> On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip >>>>> SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on >>>>> (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, >>>>> so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. >>>>> >>>>> This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is >>>>> broken. >>>> If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. >>>> I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. >>>> >>>>> The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference >>>>> schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to >>>>> boot into next stage. >>>> Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and >>>> I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. >>> Not sure if you have read my previous mail for answer all your comments, >>> >>> I do agree DTS should represent the hardware, but please note that the DTS >>> is no kind of standard, and people always choose what they need and add >>> those part in there dts, but not always add all the property and >>> everyone use the same model. I would say there are many boards does not have this >>> 'vmmc-supply’ in there emmc node. >> That is exactly the reason why I bumped the decision up the stairs (to Tom and/or >> Simon): what you are saying makes sense to me (viewed through your eyes and >> from your specific usecase), but it directly contradicts how the DTS usage is intended. >> >> In other words: Tom (as the top-level decision maker) or Simon (who owns the >> device-model and therefore will also have an opinion on DTS usage) should make >> the final call. > My answer is that I would strongly suspect that over in linux "we have N > different close-enough boards using this one DTS" isn't acceptable. You > make a dtsi and include it from the board and things that aren't common > don't go into the dtsi. And yes, when starting off everyone (myself > included) copies the reference platform dts and then changes it as > needed, and sometimes misses a thing or two. But no, I don't think we > want a wrong dts and I'm pretty sure the kernel really wouldn't want > wrong dts files and the general goal is that excluding the -u-boot.dtsi > files, ours are copies of the kernel. I don't think this is a "wrong dts" after my patch, these two nodes are not mark as required property in kernel, so many dts emmc node does not have it. I check the latest kernel dtsi in arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi [1], the emmc node do not have 'vmmc' and 'vqmmc' while the SD node have, which just like description in my commit message. Well, I don't know why U-Boot project is so difficult to accept a reasonable patch now, I don't want to make you unhappy, but make 'every board must have its own dts' in U-Boot to make every developer to join U-Boot does not make sense to me. The kernel need different dts for different board because they need to use/control those different feature, but U-Boot is not the case, U-Boot should work if the storage driver works. Thanks, - Kever [1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi#L208 >
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 12:27:42PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > Hi Tom, > > > On 12/07/2018 10:13 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:24:22PM +0100, Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >> Kever, > >> > >>> On 07.12.2018, at 02:39, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Philipp, > >>> > >>> On 12/06/2018 09:50 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote: > >>>> +Tom > >>>> > >>>>> On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip > >>>>> SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on > >>>>> (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, > >>>>> so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. > >>>>> > >>>>> This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is > >>>>> broken. > >>>> If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. > >>>> I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. > >>>> > >>>>> The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference > >>>>> schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to > >>>>> boot into next stage. > >>>> Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and > >>>> I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. > >>> Not sure if you have read my previous mail for answer all your comments, > >>> > >>> I do agree DTS should represent the hardware, but please note that the DTS > >>> is no kind of standard, and people always choose what they need and add > >>> those part in there dts, but not always add all the property and > >>> everyone use the same model. I would say there are many boards does not have this > >>> 'vmmc-supply’ in there emmc node. > >> That is exactly the reason why I bumped the decision up the stairs (to Tom and/or > >> Simon): what you are saying makes sense to me (viewed through your eyes and > >> from your specific usecase), but it directly contradicts how the DTS usage is intended. > >> > >> In other words: Tom (as the top-level decision maker) or Simon (who owns the > >> device-model and therefore will also have an opinion on DTS usage) should make > >> the final call. > > My answer is that I would strongly suspect that over in linux "we have N > > different close-enough boards using this one DTS" isn't acceptable. You > > make a dtsi and include it from the board and things that aren't common > > don't go into the dtsi. And yes, when starting off everyone (myself > > included) copies the reference platform dts and then changes it as > > needed, and sometimes misses a thing or two. But no, I don't think we > > want a wrong dts and I'm pretty sure the kernel really wouldn't want > > wrong dts files and the general goal is that excluding the -u-boot.dtsi > > files, ours are copies of the kernel. > I don't think this is a "wrong dts" after my patch, these two nodes are > not mark > as required property in kernel, so many dts emmc node does not have it. > I check the latest kernel dtsi in arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi [1], > the emmc node do not have 'vmmc' and 'vqmmc' while the SD node have, which > just like description in my commit message. OK. So this would fall into the category of "sync with upstream dts" then, right? That is what we want. > Well, I don't know why U-Boot project is so difficult to accept a > reasonable patch now, I don't > want to make you unhappy, but make 'every board must have its own dts' > in U-Boot to make > every developer to join U-Boot does not make sense to me. The kernel > need different > dts for different board because they need to use/control those different > feature, but U-Boot > is not the case, U-Boot should work if the storage driver works. Well, here's the thing. If you want U-Boot to then load and pass the correct DTB to the kernel, we need per-board tweaks to the code anyhow to find and load that DTB (see the various "findfdt" environment scripts for example). If you want to rework things so that you have a "generic" type board under U-Boot that's more clearly not tied to any specific board but instead runs on many, that might help clear things up too. Hope this helps!
On 12/11/2018 02:20 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 12:27:42PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> >> On 12/07/2018 10:13 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:24:22PM +0100, Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>> Kever, >>>> >>>>> On 07.12.2018, at 02:39, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Philipp, >>>>> >>>>> On 12/06/2018 09:50 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>>> +Tom >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip >>>>>>> SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on >>>>>>> (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, >>>>>>> so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is >>>>>>> broken. >>>>>> If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. >>>>>> I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference >>>>>>> schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to >>>>>>> boot into next stage. >>>>>> Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and >>>>>> I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. >>>>> Not sure if you have read my previous mail for answer all your comments, >>>>> >>>>> I do agree DTS should represent the hardware, but please note that the DTS >>>>> is no kind of standard, and people always choose what they need and add >>>>> those part in there dts, but not always add all the property and >>>>> everyone use the same model. I would say there are many boards does not have this >>>>> 'vmmc-supply’ in there emmc node. >>>> That is exactly the reason why I bumped the decision up the stairs (to Tom and/or >>>> Simon): what you are saying makes sense to me (viewed through your eyes and >>>> from your specific usecase), but it directly contradicts how the DTS usage is intended. >>>> >>>> In other words: Tom (as the top-level decision maker) or Simon (who owns the >>>> device-model and therefore will also have an opinion on DTS usage) should make >>>> the final call. >>> My answer is that I would strongly suspect that over in linux "we have N >>> different close-enough boards using this one DTS" isn't acceptable. You >>> make a dtsi and include it from the board and things that aren't common >>> don't go into the dtsi. And yes, when starting off everyone (myself >>> included) copies the reference platform dts and then changes it as >>> needed, and sometimes misses a thing or two. But no, I don't think we >>> want a wrong dts and I'm pretty sure the kernel really wouldn't want >>> wrong dts files and the general goal is that excluding the -u-boot.dtsi >>> files, ours are copies of the kernel. >> I don't think this is a "wrong dts" after my patch, these two nodes are >> not mark >> as required property in kernel, so many dts emmc node does not have it. >> I check the latest kernel dtsi in arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi [1], >> the emmc node do not have 'vmmc' and 'vqmmc' while the SD node have, which >> just like description in my commit message. > OK. So this would fall into the category of "sync with upstream dts" > then, right? That is what we want. OK, Got it, 'sync with upstream dts' is a good and acceptable commit message rather than the real reason why we need the patch. Philipp, Do you need me to send out a patch with update the commit message? Thanks, - Kever >> Well, I don't know why U-Boot project is so difficult to accept a >> reasonable patch now, I don't >> want to make you unhappy, but make 'every board must have its own dts' >> in U-Boot to make >> every developer to join U-Boot does not make sense to me. The kernel >> need different >> dts for different board because they need to use/control those different >> feature, but U-Boot >> is not the case, U-Boot should work if the storage driver works. > Well, here's the thing. If you want U-Boot to then load and pass the > correct DTB to the kernel, we need per-board tweaks to the code anyhow > to find and load that DTB (see the various "findfdt" environment scripts > for example). If you want to rework things so that you have a "generic" > type board under U-Boot that's more clearly not tied to any specific > board but instead runs on many, that might help clear things up too. > Hope this helps! >
> On 12.12.2018, at 10:05, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: > > > > On 12/11/2018 02:20 AM, Tom Rini wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 12:27:42PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: >>> Hi Tom, >>> >>> >>> On 12/07/2018 10:13 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>>> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 02:24:22PM +0100, Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>> Kever, >>>>> >>>>>> On 07.12.2018, at 02:39, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Philipp, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12/06/2018 09:50 PM, Philipp Tomsich wrote: >>>>>>> +Tom >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 05.12.2018, at 03:25, Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip >>>>>>>> SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on >>>>>>>> (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, >>>>>>>> so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is >>>>>>>> broken. >>>>>>> If the PMIC driver is broken, we should fix the PMIC driver. >>>>>>> I would feel more comfortable w/o this statement. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference >>>>>>>> schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to >>>>>>>> boot into next stage. >>>>>>> Again, this is not how the DTS should be used. I believe that Heiko, Fabio and >>>>>>> I had already highlighted this in comments to the earlier thread. >>>>>> Not sure if you have read my previous mail for answer all your comments, >>>>>> >>>>>> I do agree DTS should represent the hardware, but please note that the DTS >>>>>> is no kind of standard, and people always choose what they need and add >>>>>> those part in there dts, but not always add all the property and >>>>>> everyone use the same model. I would say there are many boards does not have this >>>>>> 'vmmc-supply’ in there emmc node. >>>>> That is exactly the reason why I bumped the decision up the stairs (to Tom and/or >>>>> Simon): what you are saying makes sense to me (viewed through your eyes and >>>>> from your specific usecase), but it directly contradicts how the DTS usage is intended. >>>>> >>>>> In other words: Tom (as the top-level decision maker) or Simon (who owns the >>>>> device-model and therefore will also have an opinion on DTS usage) should make >>>>> the final call. >>>> My answer is that I would strongly suspect that over in linux "we have N >>>> different close-enough boards using this one DTS" isn't acceptable. You >>>> make a dtsi and include it from the board and things that aren't common >>>> don't go into the dtsi. And yes, when starting off everyone (myself >>>> included) copies the reference platform dts and then changes it as >>>> needed, and sometimes misses a thing or two. But no, I don't think we >>>> want a wrong dts and I'm pretty sure the kernel really wouldn't want >>>> wrong dts files and the general goal is that excluding the -u-boot.dtsi >>>> files, ours are copies of the kernel. >>> I don't think this is a "wrong dts" after my patch, these two nodes are >>> not mark >>> as required property in kernel, so many dts emmc node does not have it. >>> I check the latest kernel dtsi in arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi [1], >>> the emmc node do not have 'vmmc' and 'vqmmc' while the SD node have, which >>> just like description in my commit message. >> OK. So this would fall into the category of "sync with upstream dts" >> then, right? That is what we want. > > OK, Got it, 'sync with upstream dts' is a good and acceptable commit > message > rather than the real reason why we need the patch. > > Philipp, > Do you need me to send out a patch with update the commit message? If you do it, you’ll save me work and the history on the list is 1:1 identical with what I apply … If you absolutely don’t have time, I’ll change the commit message as I process this for my end-of-week pull-request. Thanks, Philipp.
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi index ce75bd5d28..04902c0bd3 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi @@ -150,8 +150,6 @@ num-slots = <1>; pinctrl-names = "default"; pinctrl-0 = <&emmc_clk>, <&emmc_cmd>, <&emmc_pwr>, <&emmc_bus8>; - vmmc-supply = <&vcc_io>; - vqmmc-supply = <&vcc_flash>; status = "okay"; };
The U-Boot eMMC does not need to care about the power for Rockchip SoC, because if the board is using eMMC, the power will default on (for bootrom), and we do not do power management for it like kernel, so the 'vmmc', 'vqmmc' is only useful for SD in U-Boot. This make U-Boot can boot into kernel even if the pmic driver is broken. The rk3288-evb dts may be used in many boards using rockchip reference schematic but with little change, so we hope it can be more robust to boot into next stage. Signed-off-by: Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com> --- Changes in v2: - only update for rk3288-evb, remove change for other boards. arch/arm/dts/rk3288-evb.dtsi | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)