From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/4] irqchip: bcm2835: If a parent interrupt is registered, chain from it.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:13:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55B1BB67.1090603@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bnf4giq7.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net>
On 07/22/2015 12:17 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> writes:
>
>> On 07/13/2015 07:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>>> The BCM2836 (Raspberry Pi 2) uses two levels of interrupt
>>> handling with the CPU-local interrupts being the root, so we
>>> need to register ours as chained off of the CPU's local
>>> interrupt.
>>
>> Sorry for the slow review; laziness after vacation!
>>
>>> diff --git
>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic.txt
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic.txt
>>
>>>
>>>
+The BCM2836 contains the same interrupt controller with the same
>>> +interrupts, but the per-CPU interrupt controller is the root,
>>> and an +interrupt there indicates that the ARMCTRL has an
>>> interrupt to handle. + Required properties:
>>>
>>> - compatible : should be "brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic"
>>
>> Since there are some differences between the bcm2835 and bcm2836
>> HW blocks, I'd expect the compatible value to be different for
>> each. In particular...
>
> Well, there are actually no differences within this block of the HW
> (HDL is unmodified), it's just where the output interrupt line gets
> consumed. But it's not much extra to add a new compatible value, so
> sure.
Mmm. I suppose that's true indeed.
So, I guess either of the following is fine for bcm2836 by me:
compatible = "brcm,bcm2836-armctrl-ic";
compatible = "brcm,bcm2836-armctrl-ic", "brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic";
The 2836 value is always needed since DT should contain the most
specific compatible value for the implementation. The 2835 value is
optional based on whether the HW block is 100% backwards-compatible
with the older HW block; a driver for the old block can run unmodified
against the new block. It's debatable whether that's true here; the
interface to this HW block itself is unchanged between
implementations, yet the way the driver for it integrates into the
system differs since it either is/isn't a top-level IRQ chip.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
To: Eric Anholt <eric-WhKQ6XTQaPysTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
linux-rpi-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Lee Jones <lee-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>,
Jason Cooper <jason-NLaQJdtUoK4Be96aLqz0jA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] irqchip: bcm2835: If a parent interrupt is registered, chain from it.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:13:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55B1BB67.1090603@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bnf4giq7.fsf-omZaPlIz5HhaEpDpdNBo/KxOck334EZe@public.gmane.org>
On 07/22/2015 12:17 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org> writes:
>
>> On 07/13/2015 07:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>>> The BCM2836 (Raspberry Pi 2) uses two levels of interrupt
>>> handling with the CPU-local interrupts being the root, so we
>>> need to register ours as chained off of the CPU's local
>>> interrupt.
>>
>> Sorry for the slow review; laziness after vacation!
>>
>>> diff --git
>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic.txt
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic.txt
>>
>>>
>>>
+The BCM2836 contains the same interrupt controller with the same
>>> +interrupts, but the per-CPU interrupt controller is the root,
>>> and an +interrupt there indicates that the ARMCTRL has an
>>> interrupt to handle. + Required properties:
>>>
>>> - compatible : should be "brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic"
>>
>> Since there are some differences between the bcm2835 and bcm2836
>> HW blocks, I'd expect the compatible value to be different for
>> each. In particular...
>
> Well, there are actually no differences within this block of the HW
> (HDL is unmodified), it's just where the output interrupt line gets
> consumed. But it's not much extra to add a new compatible value, so
> sure.
Mmm. I suppose that's true indeed.
So, I guess either of the following is fine for bcm2836 by me:
compatible = "brcm,bcm2836-armctrl-ic";
compatible = "brcm,bcm2836-armctrl-ic", "brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic";
The 2836 value is always needed since DT should contain the most
specific compatible value for the implementation. The 2835 value is
optional based on whether the HW block is 100% backwards-compatible
with the older HW block; a driver for the old block can run unmodified
against the new block. It's debatable whether that's true here; the
interface to this HW block itself is unchanged between
implementations, yet the way the driver for it integrates into the
system differs since it either is/isn't a top-level IRQ chip.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] irqchip: bcm2835: If a parent interrupt is registered, chain from it.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:13:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55B1BB67.1090603@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bnf4giq7.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net>
On 07/22/2015 12:17 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> writes:
>
>> On 07/13/2015 07:35 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>>> The BCM2836 (Raspberry Pi 2) uses two levels of interrupt
>>> handling with the CPU-local interrupts being the root, so we
>>> need to register ours as chained off of the CPU's local
>>> interrupt.
>>
>> Sorry for the slow review; laziness after vacation!
>>
>>> diff --git
>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic.txt
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic.txt
>>
>>>
>>>
+The BCM2836 contains the same interrupt controller with the same
>>> +interrupts, but the per-CPU interrupt controller is the root,
>>> and an +interrupt there indicates that the ARMCTRL has an
>>> interrupt to handle. + Required properties:
>>>
>>> - compatible : should be "brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic"
>>
>> Since there are some differences between the bcm2835 and bcm2836
>> HW blocks, I'd expect the compatible value to be different for
>> each. In particular...
>
> Well, there are actually no differences within this block of the HW
> (HDL is unmodified), it's just where the output interrupt line gets
> consumed. But it's not much extra to add a new compatible value, so
> sure.
Mmm. I suppose that's true indeed.
So, I guess either of the following is fine for bcm2836 by me:
compatible = "brcm,bcm2836-armctrl-ic";
compatible = "brcm,bcm2836-armctrl-ic", "brcm,bcm2835-armctrl-ic";
The 2836 value is always needed since DT should contain the most
specific compatible value for the implementation. The 2835 value is
optional based on whether the HW block is 100% backwards-compatible
with the older HW block; a driver for the old block can run unmodified
against the new block. It's debatable whether that's true here; the
interface to this HW block itself is unchanged between
implementations, yet the way the driver for it integrates into the
system differs since it either is/isn't a top-level IRQ chip.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-24 4:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-14 1:35 Raspberry Pi 2 interrupt controller support (v2) Second round Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] irqchip: bcm2835: Refactor handle_IRQ() calls out of MAKE_HWIRQ Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] irqchip: bcm2835: If a parent interrupt is registered, chain from it Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-22 2:08 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-22 2:08 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-22 2:08 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-22 18:17 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-22 18:17 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-24 4:13 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2015-07-24 4:13 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-24 4:13 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-14 1:35 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] irqchip: Add documentation for the bcm2836 interrupt controller Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] irqchip: Add bcm2836 interrupt controller for Raspberry Pi 2 Eric Anholt
2015-07-14 1:35 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-22 2:09 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-22 2:09 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-22 2:09 ` Stephen Warren
2015-07-22 18:02 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-22 18:02 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-22 18:02 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-26 9:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-07-26 9:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-07-26 9:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-07-27 18:42 ` [PATCH] irq-bcm2836: Move SMP boot to the irqchip code Eric Anholt
2015-07-27 18:42 ` Eric Anholt
2015-07-27 18:46 ` Florian Fainelli
2015-07-27 18:46 ` Florian Fainelli
2015-07-27 20:09 ` [PATCH] irqchip: bcm2836: Use a CPU notifier enable IPIs Eric Anholt
2015-07-27 20:09 ` Eric Anholt
2015-08-02 10:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-02 10:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-02 10:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-03 23:23 ` Eric Anholt
2015-08-03 23:23 ` Eric Anholt
2015-08-03 23:23 ` Eric Anholt
2015-08-04 7:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-04 7:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-04 7:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55B1BB67.1090603@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.