On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 7:48 PM Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Shift the bit masks for `PIN_CFG_PIN_MAP_MASK` and `PIN_CFG_PIN_REG_MASK`,
> to accommodate `PIN_CFG_VARIABLE` using `BIT(62)`.
>
> Previously, these bit masks were placed higher up in the bit range, which
> did not leave room for `PIN_CFG_VARIABLE` at `BIT(62)`. By adjusting these
> masks, we ensure that `PIN_CFG_VARIABLE` can occupy `BIT(62)` without any
> conflicts. The updated masks are now:
> - `PIN_CFG_PIN_MAP_MASK`: `GENMASK_ULL(61, 54)` (was `GENMASK_ULL(62, 55)`)
> - `PIN_CFG_PIN_REG_MASK`: `GENMASK_ULL(53, 46)` (was `GENMASK_ULL(54, 47)`)
>
> Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
i.e. will queue in renesas-pinctrl for v6.11.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
