Re: VisionFive 2 eMMC boot issues.

On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 07:02:02PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On 28/07/2026 15:42, Milad wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> > 
> > Little reminder on this thread regarding my VisionFive 2 MMC boot issue.
> > 
> > Archive link:
> > https://lists.u-boot-project.org/pipermail/u-boot/2026-July/624724.html
> > 
> > Just following up to see if anyone has had a chance to look at the details
> > in my original message on the link.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> 
> I don't think you CCed anyone that cares about the platform on that
> patch so that's probably the problem there.
> 
> Is this the same issue that Ilya attempted to fix in the upstream version
> of the devicetree for this platform?
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/

Quoting logs in the link,

> SD card (mmc1) fails to initialize in U-Boot. Full serial output:
>
> Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110
> ** Booting bootflow '<NULL>' with efi_mgr
> Loading Boot0000 'usb 0' failed
> Error reading cluster
> Loading Boot0001 'mmc 1' failed
> EFI boot manager: Cannot load any image
> Boot failed (err=-14)
> Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110
> Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110
> Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110
> Card did not respond to voltage select! : -110

The problem happens in U-Boot shell instead of SPL stage, so it probably
has nothing to do with the bootph-pre-ram change. Even if the pinctrl
isn't available at SPL stage, it should still be picked by the proper
U-Boot.

> My subsequent PR for that lead to issues and it never got applied.
> https://lore.kernel.org/soc/[email protected]/
> 
> This happened back in March, and I just have not had the time nor
> inclination to actually sort it out, and nobody else has stepped up.
> 
> I think I will just pick that one patch back up again and resubmit
> it for this cycle. After all, it doesn't change the configuration, just
> the point at which the configuration should be done.
> 
> If you could let me know if that patch helps, then it would be another
> argument for actually (finally) getting it merged.
> 
> Thanks,
> Conor.

Best regards,
Yao Zi