On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 12:27:30PM -0800, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> From: Tim Michals <[email protected]>
>
> As per sram bindings, "sram" property can be list of phandles.
> When more than one sram phandles are listed, driver can't parse second
> phandle's address correctly. Because, phandle index is passed to the API
> instead of offset of address from reg property which is always 0 as per
> sram.yaml bindings. Fix it by passing 0 to the API instead of sram
> phandle index.
>
> Fixes: 77fcdf51b8ca ("remoteproc: xlnx: Add sram support")
>
> Signed-off-by: Tim Michals <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> index bd619a6c42aa..970a9ef97945 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_get_sram_banks(struct
> zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core)
> }
>
> /* Get SRAM device address */
> - ret = of_property_read_reg(sram_np, i, &abs_addr, &size);
> + ret = of_property_read_reg(sram_np, 0, &abs_addr, &size);
I'll pick this up in two weeks when 6.20-rc1 comes out.
On a separate note, it would help if an example that includes an "sram" was part
of the xlnx_r5 bindings.
Thanks,
Mathieu
> if (ret) {
> dev_err(dev, "failed to get reg property\n");
> goto fail_sram_get;
>
> base-commit: 85ab651885e1b542ee0bb9ec4642ef0b11716997
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
