Hi Rob, > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Herring [mailto:robh@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 9:06 PM > To: Po Liu > Cc: Shawn Guo; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Roy Zang; Arnd Bergmann; Marc Zyngier; > Stuart Yoder; Leo Li; M.H. Lian; Murali Karicheri; Bjorn Helgaas; > Mingkai Hu > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] pci:aer: add support aer interrupt with none > MSI/MSI-X/INTx mode > > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 03:37:27AM +0000, Po Liu wrote: > > Hi Shawn, > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Shawn Guo [mailto:shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 8:52 AM > > > To: Po Liu > > > Cc: linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Roy Zang; > > > Arnd Bergmann; Marc Zyngier; Stuart Yoder; Leo Li; M.H. Lian; > > > Murali Karicheri; Bjorn Helgaas; Mingkai Hu > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] pci:aer: add support aer interrupt with > > > none MSI/MSI-X/INTx mode > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:40:59PM +0800, Po Liu wrote: > > > > On some platforms, root port doesn't support MSI/MSI-X/INTx in RC > mode. > > > > When chip support the aer interrupt with none MSI/MSI-X/INTx > > > mode, > maybe there is interrupt line for aer pme etc. Search the > > > interrupt > number in the fdt file. Then fixup the dev->irq with it. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Po Liu <po.liu@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > Will the new kernel work with existing/old DTB? I'm trying to > > > understand the dependency between driver and DTS changes. > > > > Yes, We've never use name 'intr' before. So we remove it is ok. > > 'aer' is a dts name for researching it's true interrupt number by > > kernel. This patch is first time to use name 'aer'. So it must be > > compatible with existing/old DTB. > > Please explain why you are not breaking compatibility in the commit > message. I asked for this on v2. Sorry, I didn't really catch what your means. Do you mean I should add why I remove the 'intr'? > > > > > --- > > > > changes for v5: > > > > - Add clear 'aer' interrup-names description > > > > > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/pci/layerscape-pci.txt | 11 +++++--- > > > > drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_core.c | 31 > > > +++++++++++++++++++--- > > > > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff > > > --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/layerscape-pci.txt > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/layerscape-pci.txt > > > > index 41e9f55..101d0a7 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/layerscape-pci.txt > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/layerscape-pci.txt > > > > @@ -18,8 +18,10 @@ Required properties: > > > > - reg: base addresses and lengths of the PCIe controller > - > > > interrupts: A list of interrupt outputs of the controller. Must > > > contain an > > > > entry for each entry in the interrupt-names property. > > > > -- interrupt-names: Must include the following entries: > > > > - "intr": The interrupt that is asserted for controller > > > interrupts > +- interrupt-names: It may be include the following > entries: > > "may be" is not okay. It should be "must" or explain when an interrupt > would not be present. Really, differences in interrupts means you need > different compatible strings. How about changing "must" to "should" or "could" and also add when to add after "aer": to explain when to add it? Thanks! > > Rob > > > > > + "aer": The interrupt that is asserted for aer interrupt > + > > > "pme": The interrupt that is asserted for pme interrupt > + ...... ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���"�)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
