On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Jeffery <andrew@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:36 -0500, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:14:10PM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@xxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > >> > Since v1: >> > >> > Rob: I haven't added your Acked-by here as I've made the following changes and >> > wanted to get your input: >> > >> > * Remove interrupt-controller as an optional property >> > * Defer to interrupt-controller bindings document for sub-node properties >> > >> > I had a discussion with Joel about whether the interrupt-controller capability >> > should be optional and the conclusion was that it should always be configured >> > by the driver. This makes an optional interrupt-controller property feel >> > redundant (and possibly inaccurate if left out) so I've removed it. >> I don't follow. What do you mean byt "configured by the driver". If the >> block supports interrupts, then it should be marked as an >> interrupt-controller. It never should have been optional. The OS can >> ignore the interrupt properties if it chooses. > > Right, clearly there was some confusion on my part. I will fix that up. > Thanks for clarifying. > Thanks for clarifying this Rob. With this cleared up, Acked-by: Joel Stanley <joel@xxxxxxxxx> -- 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
