On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 01:01:20PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 12/02/2024 17:50, Johan Hovold wrote: > > Whether the 'msi-map-mask' property is needed or not depends on how the > > MSI interrupts are mapped and it should therefore not be described as > > required. > > I could imagine that on all devices the interrupts are mapped in a way > you need to provide msi-map-mask. IOW, can there be a Qualcomm platform > without msi-map-mask? I don't have access to the documentation so I'll leave that for you guys to determine. I do note that the downstream DT does not use it and that we have a new devicetree in linux-next which also does not have it: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240125-topic-sm8650-upstream-pcie-its-v1-1-cb506deeb43e@xxxxxxxxxx But at least the latter looks like an omission that should be fixed. Johan
