On 13 November 2012 06:00, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 05:50 AM, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>> Register IRQ domains through Device Tree for the internal and external
>> interrupt controllers. Register the same IRQ ranges as previously to
>> provide backward compatibility for non-DT drivers.
>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/bcm63xx/epic.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/bcm63xx/epic.txt
>
> Rather than putting binding docs in an arch-specific directory, perhaps
> put them into a device-type-specific directory, such as
> bindings/interrupt-controller/brcm,bcm63xx-epic.txt?
Almost everyone has their interrupt-controller bindings in
$arch/$platform, but if interrupt-controller is the preferred
location, I can certainly move it there; I have no hard preference for
any location.
>
>> +- #interrupt-cells: <2>
>> + This controller supports level and edge triggered interrupts. The
>> + first cell is the interrupt number, the second is a 1:1 mapping to
>> + the linux interrupt flags.
>
> The DT documentation should be self-contained, and not reference
> anything OS-specific. In this case, you could reference
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt
> for the interrupt flags.
Good Idea, I'll do that for the next iteration.
>> diff --git a/arch/mips/bcm63xx/dts/bcm6328.dtsi b/arch/mips/bcm63xx/dts/bcm6328.dtsi
>
>> ranges = <0 0x10000000 0x20000>;
>> compatible = "simple-bus";
>> +
>> + interrupt-parent = <&ipic>;
>> +
>> + perf@0 {
>> + epic: interrupt-controller@18 {
>
> Don't you need some reg properties in the perf and interrupt-controller
> nodes so that the register address can be determined?
Since there is no support code for that property yet I did not add it.
I haven't quite finished yet how the final bindings will be (since
there are/were a few things I haven't finished researching yet, e.g.
how this controller works in SMP context, and how interrupt
controllers are supposed to work).
I can add all expected properties now and add support for them later,
but I feel that this might add properties that will then never
supported, and nobody updates the documentation for that, so I'd
rather like to keep the documentation/dts(i) in sync with what the
actual code expects/supports.
Jonas
