Hi Rob,
On 27/08/2025 17:16, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 10:39 AM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 10:32 AM James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Probing MPAM is convoluted. MSCs that are integrated with a CPU may
>>> only be accessible from those CPUs, and they may not be online.
>>> Touching the hardware early is pointless as MPAM can't be used until
>>> the system-wide common values for num_partid and num_pmg have been
>>> discovered.
>
> [...]
>
>>> +static int mpam_dt_parse_resources(struct mpam_msc *msc, void *ignored)
>>> +{
>>> + int err, num_ris = 0;
>>> + const u32 *ris_idx_p;
>>> + struct device_node *iter, *np;
>>> +
>>> + np = msc->pdev->dev.of_node;
>>> + for_each_child_of_node(np, iter) {
>>
>> Use for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped()
>>
>>> + ris_idx_p = of_get_property(iter, "reg", NULL);
>>
>> This is broken on big endian and new users of of_get_property() are
>> discouraged. Use of_property_read_reg().
>
> Err, this is broken on little endian as the DT is big endian.
>
> So this was obviously not tested as I'm confident you didn't test on BE.
'not tested' is shades of grey. I fed the FVP ~6 different DTB files to hit the different
paths through the driver. The FVP only has controls under RIS-0, so all of those only
defined RIS-0, and unsurprisingly didn't notice the helper isn't endian safe.
Thanks,
James
