drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Tristram Ha <tristram.ha@microchip.com>
The initial code used 32-bit register. After that it was changed to 0x1F
so it is no longer appropriate to use 32-bit write.
Fixes: e1add7dd6183 ("net: dsa: microchip: use common irq routines for girq and pirq")
Signed-off-by: Tristram Ha <tristram.ha@microchip.com>
---
drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
index 1e0085cd9a9a..3ad0879b00cd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
@@ -2185,7 +2185,7 @@ static void ksz_irq_bus_sync_unlock(struct irq_data *d)
struct ksz_device *dev = kirq->dev;
int ret;
- ret = ksz_write32(dev, kirq->reg_mask, kirq->masked);
+ ret = ksz_write8(dev, kirq->reg_mask, kirq->masked);
if (ret)
dev_err(dev->dev, "failed to change IRQ mask\n");
--
2.34.1
On Tue, 2024-05-28 at 14:35 -0700, Tristram.Ha@microchip.com wrote: > From: Tristram Ha <tristram.ha@microchip.com> > > The initial code used 32-bit register. After that it was changed to 0x1F > so it is no longer appropriate to use 32-bit write. IMHO the above sentence is too much unclear. It sort of implies that the currently used register is 8 bit wide because such register address can be represented with 8 bit - which in turn sounds weird or irrelevant. I guess some documentation describes register 0x1F, please rephrase the changelog accordingly. Thanks, Paolo
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: microchip: fix wrong register write when masking > interrupt > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content > is safe > > On Tue, 2024-05-28 at 14:35 -0700, Tristram.Ha@microchip.com wrote: > > From: Tristram Ha <tristram.ha@microchip.com> > > > > The initial code used 32-bit register. After that it was changed to 0x1F > > so it is no longer appropriate to use 32-bit write. > > IMHO the above sentence is too much unclear. It sort of implies that > the currently used register is 8 bit wide because such register address > can be represented with 8 bit - which in turn sounds weird or > irrelevant. > > I guess some documentation describes register 0x1F, please rephrase the > changelog accordingly. I will clarify the comment. Initially the REG_SW_PORT_INT_MASK__4 is defined as 0x001C in ksz9477_reg.h and REG_PORT_INT_MASK is defined as 0x#01F. Because the global and port interrupt handling is about the same new REG_SW_PORT_INT_MASK__1 is defined as 0x1F in ksz_common.h. This works as only the least significant bits have effect. As a result the 32-bit write needs to be changed to 8-bit.
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.