On 24/02/13 11:08AM, Andrew Davis wrote:
> On 2/13/24 3:19 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > 2024-02-13 at 09:03, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> > > From: Chintan Vankar <c-vankar@xxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Change offset in mux-reg-masks property for serdes_ln_ctrl node
> > > since reg-mux property is used in compatible.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 2765149273f4 ("mux: mmio: use reg property when parent device is not a syscon")
> > > Signed-off-by: Chintan Vankar <c-vankar@xxxxxx>
> > > Acked-by: Andrew Davis <afd@xxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@xxxxxx>
> > > ---
...
> > > + mux-reg-masks = <0x0 0x3>, <0x4 0x3>, /* SERDES0 lane0/1 select */
> > > + <0x8 0x3>, <0xc 0x3>, /* SERDES0 lane2/3 select */
> > > + <0x10 0x3>, <0x14 0x3>, /* SERDES1 lane0/1 select */
> > > + <0x18 0x3>, <0x1c 0x3>, /* SERDES1 lane2/3 select */
> > > + <0x20 0x3>, <0x24 0x3>, /* SERDES2 lane0/1 select */
> > > + <0x28 0x3>, <0x2c 0x3>; /* SERDES2 lane2/3 select */
> > > idle-states = <J784S4_SERDES0_LANE0_PCIE1_LANE0>,
> > > <J784S4_SERDES0_LANE1_PCIE1_LANE1>,
> > > <J784S4_SERDES0_LANE2_IP3_UNUSED>,
> >
> > Ouch. I suspect there is a similar problem in
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-mcu-wakeup.dtsi:
> >
> >
> > fss: bus@47000000 {
> > compatible = "simple-bus";
> > reg = <0x0 0x47000000 0x0 0x100>;
> > #address-cells = <2>;
> > #size-cells = <2>;
> > ranges;
> >
> > hbmc_mux: mux-controller@47000004 {
> > compatible = "reg-mux";
> > reg = <0x00 0x47000004 0x00 0x2>;
> > #mux-control-cells = <1>;
> > - mux-reg-masks = <0x4 0x2>; /* HBMC select */
> > + mux-reg-masks = <0x0 0x2>; /* HBMC select */
> > };
> >
> > Who knows what non-upstreamed devices and devicetrees are affected?
> > I guess we need to revert 2765149273f4 ("mux: mmio: use reg property
> > when parent device is not a syscon") unless someone sees a sane way
> > to fix this.
>
> There are only two in-tree nodes with "reg-mux" with a reg property: the
> one this patch fixes, and the hbmc_mux you point out, both in TI devices.
> I'd say it is safe to assume we are the only users, and our non-upstreamed
> DTs depend on that patch, reverting it would cause more issues for
> out-of-tree users than just fixing the two broken nodes above.
Peter,
Is it alright for this patch to be merged, given Andrew's response above?
The problem with "hbmc_mux" node that you pointed out above could be fixed
by another patch. Please let me know.
Regards,
Siddharth.
