Re: [PATCH v5] dma: qcom: bam_dma: Fix command element mask field for BAM v1.6.0+

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On Mon, Jun 08, 2026 at 11:20:01AM +0530, Md Sadre Alam wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 6/4/2026 4:15 PM, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 11:01:51PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On 14-05-26, 12:09, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote:
> > > > From: Md Sadre Alam <md.alam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > 
> > > > BAM version 1.6.0 and later changed the behavior of the mask field in
> > > > command elements for read operations. In newer BAM versions, the mask
> > > > field for read commands contains the upper 4 bits of the destination
> > > > address to support 36-bit addressing, while for write commands it
> > > > continues to function as a traditional write mask.
> > > 
> > > But this changes behaviour for all versions. What happens to folks on older
> > > versions, wont this break for them, if not what am I missing
> 
> It will not have any impact on older version of BAM controller. Konrad also
> had a similar concern. Please refer to [1]
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/2394e63f-1df7-764e-5489-3567065707a1@xxxxxxxxxxx/

So, you got this question once, have resent the patches, but didn't
guess that there will be the similar question from other reviewers?

Usually a question means that the commit needs to be improved. Adding a
simple "Previously this field was ignored for read commands" would have
saved you from futher questions.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry