> > +Example (5) > > +=========== > > + > > +/ { > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > + > > + msi_a: msi-controller@a { > > + reg = <0xa 0x1>; > > + compatible = "vendor,some-controller"; > > + msi-controller; > > + #msi-cells = <1>; > > + }; > > + > > + msi_b: msi-controller@b { > > + reg = <0xb 0x1>; > > + compatible = "vendor,some-controller"; > > + msi-controller; > > + #msi-cells = <1>; > > + }; > > + > > + msi_c: msi-controller@c { > > + reg = <0xc 0x1>; > > + compatible = "vendor,some-controller"; > > + msi-controller; > > + #msi-cells = <1>; > > + }; > > + > > + pci: pci@c { > > + reg = <0xf 0x1>; > > + compatible = "vendor,pcie-root-complex"; > > + device_type = "pci"; > > + > > + /* > > + * The sideband data provided to MSI controller a is the > > + * RID, but the high bit of the bus number is negated. > > + * The sideband data provided to MSI controller b is the > > + * RID, identity-mapped. > > + * MSI controller c is not addressable. > > + */ > > + msi-map = <0x0000 &msi_a 0x8000 0x08000>, > > + <0x8000 &msi_a 0x0000 0x08000>, > > + <0x0000 &msi_b 0x0000 0x10000>; > > + }; > > they can be identical right? like > <0x8000 &msi_a 0x0000 0x08000>, > <0x8000 &msi_b 0x0000 0x08000>; In general that would be valid, yes. In this case two entries are required for MSI controller a because the high bit passed to it is negated. This does not occur for MSI controller b, so it only requires a single entry to describe the transformation. Thanks, Mark. -- 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