We've ended up with some inconsistencies between the addresses in the
DT node labels and the actual offsets of the partitions; this brings
them back in sync.
Signed-off-by: Zev Weiss <zev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fixes: 529022738c8e ("ARM: dts: Add OpenBMC flash layout")
Fixes: 8dec60e7b8d0 ("ARM: dts: aspeed: Grow u-boot partition 64MiB OpenBMC flash layout")
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout-64.dtsi | 2 +-
arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout.dtsi | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout-64.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout-64.dtsi
index 31f59de5190b..7af41361c480 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout-64.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout-64.dtsi
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ rofs@a00000 {
label = "rofs";
};
- rwfs@6000000 {
+ rwfs@2a00000 {
reg = <0x2a00000 0x1600000>; // 22MB
label = "rwfs";
};
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout.dtsi
index 6c26524e93e1..b47e14063c38 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/openbmc-flash-layout.dtsi
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ kernel@80000 {
label = "kernel";
};
- rofs@c0000 {
+ rofs@4c0000 {
reg = <0x4c0000 0x1740000>;
label = "rofs";
};
--
2.34.1
