On 13/05/2020 19:24, Sudeep Holla wrote: Hi, > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:30:12AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> The Mali binding insists on the GPU interrupts to be in ordered as: job, >> mmu, gpu. >> Sort the GPU interrupts and interrupt-names properties accordingly. >> > > I assume this is not a bug fix, just clean up to make it 100% binding > compliant. Things work just fine without this too. Just for my info. Yes, that's true, it works either way right now. Originally I was under the impression that the purpose of interrupt-names was to allow any order of interrupts, but according to Rob this is just to support optional IRQs (so having a shorter list). The bindings require a certain order, and the dt-schema validation complains if that differs in the DT. Cheers, Andre
