Am 12.09.2013 17:19, schrieb Stephen Warren:
IRQs, DMA channels, and GPIOs are all different things. Their bindings are defined independently. While it's good to define new types of bindings consistently with other bindings, this hasn't always happened, so you can make zero assumptions about the IRQ bindings by reading the documentation for any other kind of binding. Multiple interrupts are defined as follows: // Optional; otherwise inherited from parent/grand-parent/... interrupt-parent = <&gpio6>; // Must be in a fixed order, unless binding defines that the // optional interrupt-names property is to be used. interrupts = <1 IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH> <2 IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW>; // Optional; binding for device defines whether it must // be present interrupt-names = "foo", "bar"; If you need multiple interrupts, each with a different parent, you need to use an interrupt-map property (Google it for a more complete explanation I guess). Unlike "interrupts", "interrupt-map" has a phandle in each entry, and hence each entry can refer to a different IRQ controller. You end up defining a dummy interrupt controller node (which may be the leaf node with multiple IRQ outputs, which then points at itself as the interrupt parent), pointing the leaf node's interrupt-parent at that node, and then having interrupt-map "demux" the N interrupt outputs to the various interrupt controllers. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
What a mess. I assume that is the price that bindings don't have to change. Thanks for clarifying that, Alexander Holler -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
