lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 0/2] PCI: Introduce MSI chip infrastructure
Date
On Monday 25 March 2013, Thierry Reding wrote:
> I think you can just make this:
>
> mpic: interrupt-controller@d0020000 {
> ...
> };
>
> ...
>
> soc {
> pcie-controller {
> marvell,msi = <&mpic>;
> };
> };
>
> And everything else should just work given the APIs I mentioned. But as
> you said it'd be good if somebody else could share their opinion about
> this.


I think the property referring to the msi controller should have a fixed
name, such as "msi-parent", to go along with "interrupt-parent".
Similarly, I would suggest using an empty "msi-controller" property
to mark the controller that is capable of serving MSIs. The Linux
implementation doesn't currently require the "interrupt-controller"
property, but I think it's good to stay close to the original interrupt
binding here for consistency.

Arnd


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-03-25 11:21    [W:0.079 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site