On Sun, Jan 03, 2021 at 05:26:29PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Thank you for the report and bisecting the issue, and sorry this broke > your system! > > Fortunately, the patch is fairly small, so there are only a limited number > of things that could go wrong. I haven't tried to analyze that message, > but I have two ideas: > > a) The added ioc->sense_off check gets triggered and the code relies > on the data being written outside of the structure > > b) the address actually needs to always be written as a 64-bit value > regardless of the instance->consistent_mask_64bit flag, as the > driver did before. This looked like it was done in error. > > Can you try the patch below instead of the revert and see if that > resolves the regression, and if it triggers the warning message I > add? Thanks Arnd, I tried your patch and it resolves the regression. It does not trigger the warning message you added. Phil
