[PATCH v2 5/9] bootstd: Correct creating of bootdev sibling

[Simon Glass]

Hi Bin,

On Sun, 30 Jul 2023 at 19:59, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 1:15 AM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >

>
> >         }
> >
> >         return 0;
> > --
>
> Regards,
> Bin
> > Use the correct function here, since there may be multiple IDE devices
> > available.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpershoek at baylibre.com>
> > ---
> >
> > (no changes since v1)
> >
> >  drivers/block/ide.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/block/ide.c b/drivers/block/ide.c
> > index 89201dd4d229..c698f9cbd558 100644
> > --- a/drivers/block/ide.c
> > +++ b/drivers/block/ide.c
> > @@ -1059,9 +1059,9 @@ static int ide_probe(struct udevice *udev)
> >                 desc->lba48 = pdesc.lba48;
> >                 desc->type = pdesc.type;
> >
> > -               ret = bootdev_setup_for_dev(udev, "ide_bootdev");
> > +               ret = bootdev_setup_for_sibling_blk(blk, "ide_bootdev");
> >                 if (ret)
> > -                       return log_msg_ret("bootdev", ret);
> > +                       return log_msg_ret("bd", ret);
>
> Why changes from bootdev to bd here? To me, bd is unclear, and sounds
> like "boardinfo" in U-Boot.

I don't need to...the goal is to have the strings be 4 bytes or less,
so they don't use up too much space in the image...but also have them
unique enough that you can look at the function and see which call
site failed.

For this one, I don't mind either way.

Regards,
Simon