From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/10] dt-bindings: irqchip: Introduce TISCI Interrupt router bindings Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 09:46:12 -0800 Message-ID: <20190214174612.GF5720@atomide.com> References: <20190212074237.2875-1-lokeshvutla@ti.com> <20190212074237.2875-6-lokeshvutla@ti.com> <20190212162247.GK5720@atomide.com> <6a274588-0fb6-2ddf-3bcc-f9e4d849ac07@ti.com> <20190213152620.GS5720@atomide.com> <4791de04-63af-4c5e-db9c-47634fcb8dc9@ti.com> <20190214154100.GB5720@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lokesh Vutla Cc: marc.zyngier@arm.com, Nishanth Menon , Santosh Shilimkar , Rob Herring , tglx@linutronix.de, jason@lakedaemon.net, Linux ARM Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Device Tree Mailing List , Sekhar Nori , Tero Kristo , Peter Ujfalusi List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org * Lokesh Vutla [190214 17:32]: > Hi Tony, > Please do not snip the on going discussion. > > On 2/14/2019 9:11 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Lokesh Vutla [190214 08:39]: > >> IMHO, device ids are something which can be used in DT. There are many other > >> things like the interrupt ranges etc.. which are discoverable from sysfw and we > >> are implementing it. > > > > We need to describe hardware in the device tree, not firmware. > > > > If you have something discoverable from the firmware, you should > > have the device driver query it from sysfw based on a hardware > > property, not based on some invented enumeration in the firmware. > > Yes we are already querying sysfw for all the irq ranges that can be > discoverable. The topic of discussion here is about the parent interrupt > controller id. I am not sure how you are expecting an id be discoverable > from system firmware especially with a name. Well names are quite standard in dts (but should be used with the phandle + offset). Think for example interrupt-names and reg-names :) > > If there is some device to firmware translation needed, hide that > > into the device driver and keep it out of the device tree. > > If preferred this can be moved to of_match_data attached to each > compatible property. Then for each SoC a new compatible needs to be created. Hiding the ID into the device driver and compatible property makes sense to me if the id is based on SoC + firmware. But I'd rather have a proper hardware based phandle + index type mapping in the dts if possible though. What does this id really consist of? Regards, Tony