The "num_tlb_lines" might not be a power-of-2 value, being 48 on
Tegra210 for example. So the current way of calculating tlb_mask
using the num_tlb_lines is not correct: tlb_mask=0x5f in case of
num_tlb_lines=48, which will trim a setting of 0x30 (48) to 0x10.
Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200917113155.13438-2-nicoleotsuka@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
smmu->pfn_mask = BIT_MASK(mc->soc->num_address_bits - PAGE_SHIFT) - 1;
dev_dbg(dev, "address bits: %u, PFN mask: %#lx\n",
mc->soc->num_address_bits, smmu->pfn_mask);
- smmu->tlb_mask = (smmu->soc->num_tlb_lines << 1) - 1;
+ smmu->tlb_mask = (1 << fls(smmu->soc->num_tlb_lines)) - 1;
dev_dbg(dev, "TLB lines: %u, mask: %#lx\n", smmu->soc->num_tlb_lines,
smmu->tlb_mask);