On 08/21/2013 03:54 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 05:25:23PM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 08/20/2013 02:44 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 05:09:34PM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>> On 08/19/2013 02:42 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 07:48:55PM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/16/2013 08:47 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to consult the implementation of DT binding for the I2C device
>>>>>>> that exposes two interrupt pins (INT1 and INT2). Both pins can be
>>>>>>> configured to generate either data ready interrupts or event interrupts.
>>>>>>> I want to implement DT binding that will handle also the situation
>>>>>>> when only one of the interrupt sources is routed from the device
>>>>>>> to the CPU.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Below is my implementation using interrupt-map:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + - interrupt-parent : phandle to the interrupt map subnode
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When using interrupt-parent to point at an interrupt map, I believe you
>>>>>> usually just point at the current node; there's no need to a child node.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + - interrupts : interrupt mapping for LPS331AP interrupt sources:
>>>>>>> + 2 sources: 0 - data ready, 1 - threshold event
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + - irq-map : irq sub-node defining interrupt map
>>>>>>> + (all properties listed below are required):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, this node isn't required.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + - #interrupt-cells : should be 1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + - #address-cells : should be 0
>>>>>>> + - #size-cells : should be 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are no addressed entities in this node, so I don't see why those
>>>>>> two properties are needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + - interrupt-map : table of entries consisting of three child elements:
>>>>>>> + - unit_interrupt_specifier - 0 : data ready, 1 : threshold event
>>>>>>> + - interrupt parent phandle
>>>>>>> + - parent unit interrupt specifier consisiting of two elements:
>>>>>>> + - index of the interrupt within the controller
>>>>>>> + - flags : should be 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's up to the binding for the node referenced by the phandle to define
>>>>>> how many cells need be present for "flags", and their meaning. This
>>>>>> binding shouldn't attempt to describe those. Equally, the concept of
>>>>>> interrupt-map should be defined elsewwere (e.g.
>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt);
>>>>>> it's a generic that shouldn't need duplication in each binding that uses
>>>>>> interrupts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +Example:
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +lps331ap@5d {
>>>>>>> + compatible = "st,lps331ap";
>>>>>>> + reg = <0x5d>;
>>>>>>> + drdy-int-pin = /bits/ 8 <2>;
>>>>>>> + interrupt-parent = <&irq_map>;
>>>>>>> + interrupts = <0>, <1>;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + irq_map: irq-map {
>>>>>>> + #interrupt-cells = <1>;
>>>>>>> + #address-cells = <0>;
>>>>>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>>>>>> + interrupt-map = <0 &gpf0 5 0>;
>>>>>>> + };
>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And here is how the driver uses this information:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - if interrupt-map is empty then the driver configures
>>>>>>> itself to work without interrupt support
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The presence or lack of interrupt support should be driven by the
>>>>>> presence of the interrupts property. interrupt-map should only be used
>>>>>> (if present) to assist in the parsing of the interrupts property.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - if only one interrupt source is available then the driver
>>>>>>> configures the device to generate data ready interrupts on
>>>>>>> the corresponding INTx pin (in this case the driver must know which
>>>>>>> of the device pins is routed to the cpu -
>>>>>>> st,data-ready-interrupt-pin property conveys this information)
>>>>>>> - if both interrupt sources are available then the driver configures
>>>>>>> the device to generate data ready interrupts on the interrupt pin
>>>>>>> corresponding to the interrupt source with index 0 and event
>>>>>>> interrupts to the interrupt source with index 1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This solution seems to be a little awkward so I'd like to ask
>>>>>>> if there is any neater way to handle presented requirements.
>>>>>>> The solution must facilitate passing information about two
>>>>>>> interrupt sources two the I2C driver. I have been unable to find
>>>>>>> similar solution in the kernel so far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed. I think it would be better to work as follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> interrupts: contains one or two interrupt specifiers. The first entry
>>>>>> always defines the data ready interrupt. The second entry, if present,
>>>>>> defines the threshold event interrupt. This at least allows the
>>>>>> following combinations to be very simple expressed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * no interrrupts
>>>>>> * just data
>>>>>> * both data and threshold (assuming they're routed to the same parent)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (you could swap the order if it's likely to be more common to have just
>>>>>> a threshold interrupt without any data interrupt).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In order to allow the presence of a threshold interrupt but no data
>>>>>> interrupt, then I think you would need interrupt-map:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> lps331ap: lps331ap@5d {
>>>>>> compatible = "st,lps331ap";
>>>>>> reg = <0x5d>;
>>>>>> interrupt-parent = <&lps331ap>;
>>>>>> interrupts = <0>, <1>;
>>>>>> interrupt-map = <0 0>, /* nowhere */
>>>>>> <1 &gpf0 6 0>;
>>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> The interrupt-names property exists for this purpose (describing
>>>>> interrupts which may or may not be present). Describing a nonexistent
>>>>> interrupt and mapping it nowhere feels like a hack to me when we can
>>>>> describe exactly what's present.
>>>>
>>>> But the rules for interrupts basically precludes the useful use of
>>>> interrupt-names.
>>>>
>>>> The interrupts property was introduced long before interrupt-names. As
>>>> such, the rule was always that entries in interrupts had to appear at a
>>>> specific index in the property, in other words, the property had to be
>>>> in a specific order, and there's no way of missing entries out.
>>>
>>> Ok, so for bindings that existed before reg-names, and never mentioned
>>> reg-names, indexed accesses to reg entries must always be used.
>>>
>>>> The interrupt-names property was added much later and more as a
>>>> documentation for the order in *.dts than as the primary lookup key.
>>>> Even with an interrupt-names property present, the order of entries in
>>>> interrupts is still fixed.
>>>>
>>>> So, using interrupt-names doesn't allow you to have optional entries in
>>>> interrupts, nor re-order the property. We really should not have added
>>>> interrupt-names, since it gives false impressions.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure why that has to be true for new bindings. The new bindings
>>> were never used before the existence of reg-names, so it doesn't seem so
>>> bad for the new bindings to require the use of reg-names, or to define
>>> some optional usage of reg-names.
>>
>> IIRC, the argument put forth was that OSs may assume a complete lack of
>> the reg-names property and only allow looking up reg values by index,
>> and hence making use of reg-names would prohibit those OSs from
>> supporting new bindings. Although that said, quite why reg-names was
>> then allowed as a property I don't know. IIRC, another argument was that
>> we didn't want to force people into the overhead of parsing via
>> reg-names when a simple index could be used instead, so reg had to
>> always have a defined order even if reg-names was allowed.
>>
>> On the assumption that reg-names wasn't retro-fitted to any "old"
>> bindings that originally just documents reg and not reg-names, then I
>> suppose we could say:
>>
>> If a binding defines reg-names, either reg-names or hard-coded indices
>> may be used to find entries in reg. Otherwise, only hard-coded indices
>> may be allowed.
>>
>> But I'm worried that people will see reg-names and assume they can put
>> entries in arbitrary order...
>
> We should fix the binding documents to make clear which bindings require
> their reg properties at fixed indexes, and those which allow for
> arbitrarily ordered named reg entries. Named reg entries are really
> useful for blocks with optional components, and given we have drivers
> using them, they're already mandatory for some bindings.
No, we should fix the bindings that have arbitrarily ordered reg
properties. There is no obvious reg examples of this that I see from a
quick scan of dts files.
There is this questionable use of "empty" for interrupt-names:
arch/arm/boot/dts/imx23.dtsi:
interrupts = <0 14 20 0
13 13 13 13>;
interrupt-names = "empty", "ssp0", "ssp1", "empty",
"gpmi0", "gpmi1", "gpmi2", "gpmi3";
Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
