From: Peter Ujfalusi peter.ujfalusi@ti.com
[ Upstream commit 288e7560e4d3e259aa28f8f58a8dfe63627a1bf6 ]
The used 0x1f mask is only valid for am335x family of SoC, different family using this type of crossbar might have different number of electable events. In case of am43xx family 0x3f mask should have been used for example. Instead of trying to handle each family's mask, just use u8 type to store the mux value since the event offsets are aligned to byte offset.
Fixes: 42dbdcc6bf965 ("dmaengine: ti-dma-crossbar: Add support for crossbar on AM33xx/AM43xx") Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi peter.ujfalusi@ti.com Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul vinod.koul@intel.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin alexander.levin@verizon.com --- drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c b/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c index 149ec2bd9bc6..8100ede095d5 100644 --- a/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c +++ b/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c @@ -46,12 +46,12 @@ struct ti_am335x_xbar_data {
struct ti_am335x_xbar_map { u16 dma_line; - u16 mux_val; + u8 mux_val; };
-static inline void ti_am335x_xbar_write(void __iomem *iomem, int event, u16 val) +static inline void ti_am335x_xbar_write(void __iomem *iomem, int event, u8 val) { - writeb_relaxed(val & 0x1f, iomem + event); + writeb_relaxed(val, iomem + event); }
static void ti_am335x_xbar_free(struct device *dev, void *route_data) @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ static void *ti_am335x_xbar_route_allocate(struct of_phandle_args *dma_spec, }
map->dma_line = (u16)dma_spec->args[0]; - map->mux_val = (u16)dma_spec->args[2]; + map->mux_val = (u8)dma_spec->args[2];
dma_spec->args[2] = 0; dma_spec->args_count = 2;