[PATCH v3 1/2] arm64: dts: imx95: Reserve eDMA channels 0-1 for V2X

[Laurentiu Mihalcea]

On 2/1/2026 7:22 PM, Peng Fan wrote:
> Hi Joy,
>
> Sorry to jump in at V3.
>
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2026 at 05:36:27PM +0800, Joy Zou wrote:
>> Reserve eDMA channels 0 and 1 on the AXI eDMA controller for exclusive
>> use by V2X (Vehicle-to-Everything) fast hash operations.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Laurentiu Mihalcea <laurentiu.mihalcea at nxp.com>
>> Tested-by: Laurentiu Mihalcea <laurentiu.mihalcea at nxp.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Joy Zou <joy.zou at nxp.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95.dtsi | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95.dtsi
>> index 55e2da094c889fc7c1096d0e36f31ae118d2a982..9ac82da2ff440e08ae8378d7ff830a568d50a354 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95.dtsi
>> @@ -631,6 +631,8 @@ edma2: dma-controller at 42000000 {
>> 				reg = <0x42000000 0x210000>;
>> 				#dma-cells = <3>;
>> 				dma-channels = <64>;
>> +				/* channels 0 and 1 reserved for V2X fast hash */
>> +				dma-channel-mask = <0x3>;
> This is wrong. Per dt-binding,
> dma-channel-mask means Bitmask of available DMA channels in ascending order,
> The usage in this patch does not match the dt-binding.


Ah, good catch. It would seem like our EDMA driver reverses the meaning of the "dma-channel-mask"

bits (i.e. bit x set means channel x reserved instead of channel x available).


Now, I wonder how we should be proceeding with this. According to the DT binding, our devicetree

configurations are wrong. Since there seem to be only 8 upstream instances in which this property is

being used I guess it wouldn't be so difficult to correct the driver's behavior and then correct the

devicetrees?