On 06/26/2012 01:31 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:43:38AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 06/26/2012 07:41 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:01:05PM +0300, Terje Bergström
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 26.06.2012 13:55, Thierry Reding wrote:
>> ...
>>>>> status = "disabled";
>>>>>
>>>>> gart = <&gart>;
>>>>>
>>>>> /* video-encoding/decoding */ mpe { reg = <0x54040000
>>>>> 0x00040000>; interrupts = <0 68 0x04>; status = "disabled";
>>>>> };
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The client device interrupts are not very interesting, so
>>>> they could be left out, too. Display controller related are
>>>> probably an exception to this.
>>>
>>> If the interrupts aren't used at all we should drop them.
>>
>> I disagree here; "used" is most likely something specific to a
>> particular OS's drivers. The HW always has the interrupts, and
>> hence they should be described in DT.
>
> Okay, I see. Does the same apply to the COP interrupts of the
> host1x node in your opinion? I don't know if it makes sense to
> describe something that's not reachable from the CPU. Yet it is
> defined in the GIC.
This probably applies to the interrupts too. The TRM does indicate
that git GIC has 4 interrupt IDs allocated to host1x. I recall Terje
saying that two of them weren't usable by the CPU though. Those two
points seem inconsistent. Terje, can you please explain further?
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
