On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 03:05:35PM +0000, Brüns, Stefan wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 12. Oktober 2017 16:17:45 CEST Vinod Koul wrote:
> > The src/dstn_addr_widths in dma_slave_caps are 32bits which doesn't
> > allow us to describe widths of larger size as src/dstn_addr_widths
> > are expressed as BIT().
> >
> > So extend the size of this to 64bits.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/linux/dmaengine.h | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/dmaengine.h b/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> > index 8319101170fc..6803614dbf7c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> > @@ -420,8 +420,8 @@ enum dma_residue_granularity {
> > * resubmitted multiple times
> > */
> > struct dma_slave_caps {
> > - u32 src_addr_widths;
> > - u32 dst_addr_widths;
> > + u64 src_addr_widths;
> > + u64 dst_addr_widths;
>
> You are aware this still overflows for BIT(DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_64_BYTES), i.e.
> BIT(64)?
Ah yes, and I also realize that extending width for this is quite a crappy
solution, why in world do we need so many bits :)
Lets fix it right way by using saner width values to represent.
>
> DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_64_BYTES is defined here:
> http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.14-rc4/source/include/linux/
> dmaengine.h#L313
>
> Probably change it to DECLARE_BITMAP(src_addr_widths,
> DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_MAX_BYTES), with DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_MAX_BYTES =
> DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_64_BYTES?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Stefan
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
~Vinod
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
