From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robin.murphy@arm.com (Robin Murphy) Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 16:19:10 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] of/device: Really only set bus DMA mask when appropriate In-Reply-To: <20181107155235.GA18618@bogus> References: <20181107080335.GA24511@lst.de> <22cbe798-612f-8c88-90e7-388202f603cf@arm.com> <20181107155235.GA18618@bogus> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 2018-11-07 3:52 pm, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 12:56:49PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: >> On 2018-11-07 8:03 am, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 11:54:15AM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: >>>> of_dma_configure() was *supposed* to be following the same logic as >>>> acpi_dma_configure() and only setting bus_dma_mask if some range was >>>> specified by the firmware. However, it seems that subtlety got lost in >>>> the process of fitting it into the differently-shaped control flow, and >>>> as a result the force_dma==true case ends up always setting the bus mask >>>> to the 32-bit default, which is not what anyone wants. >>>> >>>> Make sure we only touch it if the DT actually said so. >>> >>> This looks good, but I think it could really use a comment as the use >>> of ret all the way down the function isn't exactly obvious. >> >> Fair point. >> >>> Let me now if you want this picked up through the OF or DMA trees. >> >> I don't mind either way; I figure I'll wait a bit longer to see if Rob has >> any preference, then resend with the comment and the tags picked up so it >> can hopefully make rc2. > > I have other fixes to send, so I can take it. Cheers Rob, I'll send you that updated version momentarily. Robin.