On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 9:09 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue 2024-09-24 10:05:08, Raul Rangel wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 6:57 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Wed 2024-09-11 12:35:14, Raul E Rangel wrote: > > > > Today we are proxying the `console=` command line args to the > > > > `param_setup_earlycon()` handler. This is done because the following are > > > > equivalent: > > > > > > > > console=uart[8250],mmio,<addr>[,options] > > > > earlycon=uart[8250],mmio,<addr>[,options] > > > > > > > > Both invocations enable an early `bootconsole`. `console=uartXXXX` is > > > > just an alias for `earlycon=uartXXXX`. > > > > > > > > In addition, when `earlycon=` (empty value) or just `earlycon` > > > > (no value) is specified on the command line, we enable the earlycon > > > > `bootconsole` specified by the SPCR table or the DT. > > > > > > > > The problem arises when `console=` (empty value) is specified on the > > > > command line. It's intention is to disable the `console`, but what > > > > happens instead is that the SPRC/DT console gets enabled. > > > > > > > > This happens because we are proxying the `console=` (empty value) > > > > parameter to the `earlycon` handler. The `earlycon` handler then sees > > > > that the parameter value is empty, so it enables the SPCR/DT > > > > `bootconsole`. > > > > > > > > This change makes it so that the `console` or `console=` parameters no > > > > longer enable the SPCR/DT `bootconsole`. I also cleans up the hack in > > > > `main.c` that would forward the `console` parameter to the `earlycon` > > > > handler. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Raul E Rangel <rrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > It like this approach. It works well: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> > > > Tested-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Thanks for reviewing and testing! I know it takes a significant amount of > > time, so thank you. > > > > > > > > I could take it via the printk tree for 6.13. From my POV, it is too > > > late for 6.12. I am sorry I have been busy with the printk rework :-( > > > > > > > 6.13 is fine. As long as it lands upstream I can cherry pick the patch into > > our forks without any pushback. > > JFYI, the patch has been committed into printk/linux.git, > branch for-6.13. Thank you! > > Best Regards, > Petr
