On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 11:55:38AM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > I think you misunderstood what I was asking. I was just asking if we still want > to keep the term 'legacy' for INTx IRQs in DT binding or not, since we recently > got rid of that terminology in PCI drivers. I still don't think that I understand :) In snps,dw-pcie.yaml we currently (6.10-rc2) have: const: legacy (for the combined IRQ) pattern: "^int(a|b|c|d)$" (for the individual IRQs) So we will need to support these indefinitely. What is it that you would want to rename? the combined irq? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me, as we would need to support two (perhaps that is what you meant). But even if you wanted to rename it, it would be hard to come up with a name. Perhaps intx, but that would be super confusing since we already have inta, intb, intc, intd. I think it is best just to not touch the binding. In kernel macros could (that have already been renamed from legacy to intx) doesn't really have anything to do with the DT binding IMO. Kind regards, Niklas
