From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Hunter Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 13/14] dt-bindings: arm-gic: Add documentation for Tegra210 AGIC Date: Sun, 8 May 2016 13:25:14 +0100 Message-ID: <572F302A.6010506@nvidia.com> References: <1461150237-15580-1-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com> <1461150237-15580-14-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com> <20160422100052.GA10606@leverpostej> <571A0739.3090502@nvidia.com> <20160422112239.GF10606@leverpostej> <5720DC1D.1080802@nvidia.com> <20160427173810.GC7359@leverpostej> <5721C597.1010105@nvidia.com> <20160428095525.GB21145@leverpostej> <572C56A6.7020408@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Mark Rutland , Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , Marc Zyngier , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Stephen Warren , Thierry Reding , Kevin Hilman , Grygorii Strashko , Lars-Peter Clausen , Linus Walleij , linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, "linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Geert, On 07/05/16 15:10, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Jon, > > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: >>> The "nvidia,tegra210-agic" string can be taken as describing any >>> Tegra-210 specific integration quirks, though I agree that's also not >>> fantastic for extending PM support beyond Tegra 210 and variants >>> thereof. >>> >>> So maybe the best approach is bailing out in the presence of clocks >>> and/or power domains after all, on the assumption that nothing today has >>> those properties, though I fear we may have problems with that later >>> down the line if/when people describe those for the root GIC to describe >>> those must be hogged, even if not explicitly managed. >> >> On further testing, by bailing out in the presence of clocks and/or >> power-domains, the problem I now see is that although the primary gic-400 >> has been registered, we still try to probe it again later as it matches >> the platform driver. One way to avoid this would be ... >> >> diff --git a/drivers/of/irq.c b/drivers/of/irq.c >> index e7bfc175b8e1..631da7ad0dbf 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/irq.c >> +++ b/drivers/of/irq.c >> @@ -556,6 +556,8 @@ void __init of_irq_init(const struct of_device_id *matches) >> * its children can get processed in a subsequent pass. >> */ >> list_add_tail(&desc->list, &intc_parent_list); >> + >> + of_node_set_flag(desc->dev, OF_POPULATED); >> } > > That sounds like the right thing to do to me... OK. The more I think about this, it does seem silly to create a device and pdata for a device that has already been instantiated. >> If this is not appropriate then I guess I will just need to use >> "tegra210-agic" for the compatibility flag. > > As I want this for plain gic-400, I'd be unhappy ;-) No problem. However, there is more work that would be needed to get this to work for root controllers which I think that you want. Cheers Jon