From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-in-10.arcor-online.net (mail-in-10.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.arcor.de", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D33DDDEE9 for ; Sun, 3 Jun 2007 06:23:56 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20070602195308.GA21618@iram.es> References: <1180720112.14219.62.camel@ld0161-tx32> <1180734314.5674.49.camel@rhino> <4fb92a9dfccf515bdc1522d08f10f823@kernel.crashing.org> <20070602085359.GA10333@iram.es> <3ebd6ca6877ea74925f066ff96ac81db@kernel.crashing.org> <20070602195308.GA21618@iram.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <12ad593bd17f769e44f05bc24eac4d0a@kernel.crashing.org> From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] Add uli1575 pci-bridge sector to MPC8641HPCN dts file. Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 22:23:32 +0200 To: Gabriel Paubert Cc: "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> Yes, I think we all agree -- it should be interrupt-controller@20, >> with 20, a0, 4d0 in the "reg" property. > > In the current tree it is called "i8259" in mpc8641_hpcn.dts. "interrupt-controller" is the preferred name for all interrupt controller nodes. The "compatible" property can easily distinguish between different types. Not that it matters all that much -- just remember that the "name" is used for device matching before "compatible" is (_should_ be, Linux ignores this part of the standard right now in most cases), so don't put junk in there! > The other > ones which have a 8259 are not usable (mpc8555 for example). I don't > even understand their reg property (19000 0 0 0 1), Very weird indeed. What bustype is this? (I looked it up, it's PCI, and I can't make heads or tails of it either -- it says it sits on bus #1, although its parent isn't bus #1; and the final "1" should be "0". Many more weird things in that node, too). > and the driver > has hardcoded addresses at 0x20 and 0xa0, which is reasonable > since I've never seen an ISA bridge put the 8259 at another address. As long as the driver (platform code I hope?) at least checks for the existence of the node, that's fair enough I guess. Actually using the "reg" would be better of course. >> I'm not sure what "compatible" should be for this node, someone >> else can dig that up :-) Oh what the hell, I'm too curious... "pnpPNP,0" it is. > I believe that "8259" should appear somewhere because of the > "8259-interrupt-acknowledge" property (defined in CHRP bindings) > which you can have on the parent bridge to speed up interrupt > vector acquisition. You're not CHRP so you have nothing to do with the CHRP bindings... Segher