Hi Geert-san, > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 10:01 PM > On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 1:31 PM Yoshihiro Shimoda > <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 8:45 PM > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:53 AM Yoshihiro Shimoda > > > <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 6:46 PM > > > > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:48 AM Yoshihiro Shimoda > > > > > <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a774c0.dtsi > > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a774c0.dtsi > > > > > > @@ -14,6 +14,12 @@ > > > > > > #address-cells = <2>; > > > > > > #size-cells = <2>; > > > > > > > > > > > > + aliases { > > > > > > + mmc0 = &sdhi0; > > > > > > + mmc1 = &sdhi1; > > > > > > + mmc3 = &sdhi3; > > > > > > + }; > > > > > > > > > > BTW, this is one of the other issues with aliases: where is mmc2? > > > > > Yes, I know why it's done this way ;-) > > > > > > > > Ah, I intended to assign the aliases 1:1 between "mmcN" and "sdhiN". > > > > But, should we use "mmc2 = &sdhi3;" instead on r8a774c0 and r8a77990? > > > > > > I'm fine with the numbering you used, as the aliases match the existing > > > labels. > > > > > > However, on R-Car Gen2 we did use contiguous numbering of the labels, > > > as early revisions of the datasheet used contiguous numbering for the > > > interfaces, while later revisions changed this. > > > I think the sensible thing to do is to make the aliases match the existing > > > labels, too. > > > > Thank you for the comment about R-Car Gen2. I didn't realized that. > > On R-Car Gen2 SoCs, they also have mmcif controllers. So, I'm thinking > > the mmc aliases should use contiguous numbering for Gen2 mmcif and sdhi > > at least. And, perhaps, I feel using same this rule (contiguous numbering) on > > Gen3 is better. But, what do you think? > > Thank you for the comment about MMCIF, I had forgotten about that. > R-Car Gen2 is even more complicated, as you have 1, 3, or 4 SDHI > instances, and may have 1 or 2 MMC instances. So is mmc0 the first > SDHI interface, or the first MMC interface? I intended that mmc0 is the first MMC interface as alphabet ordering of the labels (mmcifN vs sdhiN). > Worse, they share pins. So the user can actually choose to use an SDHI or > MMCIF instance on some of the pin groups (for now ignoring that MMCIF > supports 1/4/8 bit, and SDHI only 1/4). > > Hence I think on R-Car Gen2 you have to add the aliases to the board DTS > files, based on the connector labels on the physical boards, which > brings us back to the original idea behind the aliases... I got it. I'll add such aliases on R-Car Gen2. Best regards, Yoshihiro Shimoda