On Wed, Oct 08, 2025 at 06:53:44AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 at 12:13, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 03:26:27PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > At present when one bootmeth fails on the final partition, the next > > > bootmeth is not tried. Adjust the logic to go to the next bootmeth, > > > which is the more natural behaviour. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > > > My feedback on v1: > > https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20250331174144.GI93000@bill-the-cat/ > > was that we need to do a documentation change when doing a behavior > > change. And I cannot recall if this change here is because of reports of > > problems or not. > > This is a long time ago, but I think it might have been an > inconsistency that I found myself. Otherwise I would probably have > mentioned the person who reported it. > > The documentation already implies the logic in this patch, as I see > it. But please suggest any changes.
OK, I guess it's because the commit message doesn't explain the bug clearly enough. Is this a correct description of the patch: At present, normally when one bootmeth fails on a partition, we move on and try the next bootmeth. However, this was not the case for the final partition due to a bug. Rework the logic so that all partitions are treated the same. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
