Take the new INTERNAL pad flag into account in validating routing IOCTL
argument. Effectively this is a SINK pad in this respect. Due to the union
there's no need to check for the particular name.
Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
index 2ec179cd1264..36886a9047c4 100644
--- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
+++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c
@@ -1787,7 +1787,8 @@ int v4l2_subdev_routing_validate(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
/* Validate the sink and source pad numbers. */
if (route->sink_pad >= sd->entity.num_pads ||
- !(sd->entity.pads[route->sink_pad].flags & MEDIA_PAD_FL_SINK)) {
+ !(sd->entity.pads[route->sink_pad].flags &
+ MEDIA_PAD_FL_SINK)) {
dev_dbg(sd->dev, "route %u sink (%u) is not a sink pad\n",
i, route->sink_pad);
goto out;
--
2.39.2
