[lkml]   [2013]   [Nov]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC 9/9] of/irq: create interrupts-extended property
On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:04:52 +1000, Peter Crosthwaite <> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Grant Likely <> wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 09:17:01 +1000, Peter Crosthwaite <> wrote:
> >> It's going to get a little verbose once you start making multiple
> >> connections as you need one mux per wire. Perhaps it could be cleaned
> >> up by making the foo_irq_mux node(s) a child of foo?
> >
> > It could, but then you need some way of attaching a driver to that node,
> > and that would require building knowledge into the driver again.
> >
> > Can you boil it down to a couple of concrete examples? What is a
> > specific example of how the platform should decide which interrupt line
> > to use?
> >
> So i've spent some time playing with this. I now have a booting kernel
> with multiple root interrupt controllers and peripheral devices
> multiply-connected to both root controllers. But only one on of the
> controllers is used by Linux (as linux being able to use multiple
> intcs is a non-trivial problem). So the scheme I am using is to have
> one of these root intc's marked as disabled via

Multiple intc's should be a solved problem. What issue are you seeing?
Or is this a microblaze specific problem?

> Working with Michal to get my patches in a list-ready state. Can you
> suggest a candidate tree we should base of for contributions to
> drivers/of/irq.c given your recent work?

Linux-next. It is always linux-next. :-)


 \ /
  Last update: 2013-11-24 22:41    [W:0.179 / U:0.396 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site