[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] mfd: mfd-core: inherit only valid dma_masks/flags from parent
On 2020-03-10 11:09 pm, Michael Walle wrote:
> Only copy the dma_masks and flags from the parent device, if the parent
> has a valid dma_mask/flags. Commit cdfee5623290 ("driver core:
> initialize a default DMA mask for platform device") initialize the DMA
> masks of a platform device. But if the parent doesn't have a dma_mask
> set, for example if it's an I2C device, the dma_mask of the child
> platform device will be set to zero again. Which leads to many "DMA mask
> not set" warnings, if the MFD cell has the of_compatible property set.
> [ 1.877937] sl28cpld-pwm sl28cpld-pwm: DMA mask not set
> [ 1.883282] sl28cpld-pwm sl28cpld-pwm.0: DMA mask not set
> [ 1.888795] sl28cpld-gpio sl28cpld-gpio: DMA mask not set
> Thus a MFD child should just inherit valid dma_masks and keep the
> platform default otherwise.
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <>
> Cc: Rob Herring <>
> Cc: Robin Murphy <>
> Cc: Russell King <>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <>
> ---
> Hi,
> I don't know if that is the correct way of handling things. Maybe I'm
> also doing something wrong in my driver, I had a look at other I2C MFD
> drivers but couldn't find a clue why they shouldn't have the same
> problem.

The underlying issue is that about 99% of MFD children should not be
going through dma_configure() at all because their parent 'real' device
is not on a DMA-capable bus, but as they are platform devices we are
forced to give them the benefit of the doubt. For DT systems the only
vaguely-reasonable heuristic to distinguish between "platform" meaning
"SoC memory-mapped device" and "platform" meaning "random crap made up
by Linux" is whether the device has a populated OF node, but MFD's trick
of hanging the parent device's OF node onto its synthesised children
kicks a hole right through even that.

Modulo any other concerns with the existing code, does the change below
make things work the way you want? It's still a bit of a bodge, but
short of invasive large-scale changes with bus types I don't see a way
to do the 'right' thing :/


diff --git a/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c b/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c
index f5a73af60dd4..1e4a6e8bd630 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ static int mfd_add_device(struct device *parent, int id,

pdev->dev.parent = parent;
pdev->dev.type = &mfd_dev_type;
- pdev->dev.dma_mask = parent->dma_mask;
+ pdev->dma_mask = parent->dma_mask ? *parent->dma_mask : 0;
pdev->dev.dma_parms = parent->dma_parms;
pdev->dev.coherent_dma_mask = parent->coherent_dma_mask;
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-11 12:25    [W:0.039 / U:2.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site