On 24/06/2022 20:03, Lad Prabhakar wrote: > Document Renesas RZ/Five (R9A07G043) SoC. > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > RFC->v1: > * Fixed Review comments pointed by Geert and Rob > --- > .../sifive,plic-1.0.0.yaml | 40 +++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/sifive,plic-1.0.0.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/sifive,plic-1.0.0.yaml > index 27092c6a86c4..5eebe0b01b4d 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/sifive,plic-1.0.0.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/sifive,plic-1.0.0.yaml > @@ -28,7 +28,10 @@ description: > > While the PLIC supports both edge-triggered and level-triggered interrupts, > interrupt handlers are oblivious to this distinction and therefore it is not > - specified in the PLIC device-tree binding. > + specified in the PLIC device-tree binding for SiFive PLIC (and similar PLIC's), > + but for the Renesas RZ/Five Soc (AX45MP AndesCore) which has NCEPLIC100 we need > + to specify the interrupt type as the flow for EDGE interrupts is different > + compared to LEVEL interrupts. > > While the RISC-V ISA doesn't specify a memory layout for the PLIC, the > "sifive,plic-1.0.0" device is a concrete implementation of the PLIC that > @@ -57,6 +60,7 @@ properties: > - enum: > - allwinner,sun20i-d1-plic > - const: thead,c900-plic > + - const: renesas,r9a07g043-plic > > reg: > maxItems: 1 > @@ -64,8 +68,7 @@ properties: > '#address-cells': > const: 0 > > - '#interrupt-cells': > - const: 1 > + '#interrupt-cells': true > > interrupt-controller: true > > @@ -91,7 +94,36 @@ required: > - interrupts-extended > - riscv,ndev > > -additionalProperties: false > +if: Make it inside allOf. Avoids further indentation change on next variant. > + properties: > + compatible: > + contains: > + const: renesas,r9a07g043-plic > +then: > + properties: > + clocks: > + maxItems: 1 > + > + resets: > + maxItems: 1 > + > + power-domains: > + maxItems: 1 > + > + '#interrupt-cells': > + const: 2 > + > + required: > + - clocks > + - resets > + - power-domains > + > +else: > + properties: > + '#interrupt-cells': > + const: 1 > + > +unevaluatedProperties: false This does not look correct, why changing additional->unevaluated here? Best regards, Krzysztof
