Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt/bindings: Add bindings for Layerscape external irqs | From | Marc Zyngier <> | Date | Fri, 9 Feb 2018 09:47:00 +0000 |
| |
On 08/02/18 15:08, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 2018-02-05 07:07, Rob Herring wrote: >>> +Example: >>> + scfg: scfg@1570000 { >>> + compatible = "fsl,ls1021a-scfg", "syscon"; >>> + ... >>> + extirq: interrupt-controller { >>> + compatible = "fsl,ls1021a-extirq"; >>> + #interrupt-cells = <3>; >>> + interrupt-controller; >>> + interrupt-parent = <&gic>; >>> + offset = <0x1ac>; >> >> Use reg here instead (with a length). > > Hm, ok, but what does the length buy us? Should the driver just ignore > it, or should it check that it is 4 and bail out if not? > >>> + interrupts = <163 164 165 167 168 169>; >> >> These don't look like GIC interrupt cells. Building this with current >> dtc will have errors. > > Indeed, they are not. They simply record which interrupt lines on the > GIC the external interrupt lines IRQ0...IRQ5 map to (the arm64 socs > apparently have 12 such lines, but I don't know what they map to). I > originally had that mapping in the driver, but I was asked to move it to > DT. Is the problem the use of the name "interrupts" for this property? > I'm happy to use something else (parent-interrupts, interrupt-mapping, > ...) I find it very hard to figure out which property names have > magic/reserved meanings. > > I don't see any warnings/errors from dtc in the 4.14 tree I'm working > on. Does it require an even newer dtc than that?
Most interrupt controllers use a private property, potentially with a range (see the recent example of the Qualcomm PDC [1]).
Thanks,
M.
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10208037/ -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
| |