Sorry, but I can't find where this property is documented?
I will add this.
Device tree properties should be a hardware description. However,
about the "irq-index", it seems a software configuration. So, even if we would
like to submit such a patch to add the property, it will be rejected.
Hmm...
Indeed it is a software configuration.
I was not aware of such a rule.
I believe there shall be plenty of situations when a per-hardware-node software configuration is
desired. What method do other use, if not device tree?
Also, even if we can add a new device tree property, we should keep backward compatible.
However, this patch seems to break a backward compatibility.
It does not.
If this new property is not defined, then it will default to 0, which will result exactly into previous
behavior.
Unfortunately, I don't have alternative solutions how to configurate per-port irq though...
# Maybe configfs??
Looks like overengineering...
Perhaps can just hardcode irq-index N for port N for now. But then, flexibility will be lost.
In more complex situations that I target in future, some of 8 GWCA interrupts will be given to virtual
machines (and/or Xen domains) to serve virtual port frontends, and some will be needed for virtual port
backends. So 8 will be not enough to have a per-consumer interrupt, and some configuration method is
needed.
Nikita
