From: Meador Inge <meador_inge@mentor.com>
To: Yoder Stuart-B08248 <B08248@freescale.com>
Cc: "Blanchard, Hollis" <Hollis_Blanchard@mentor.com>,
"devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org"
<devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: document the MPIC device tree binding
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 14:24:57 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D374899.20402@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9F6FE96B71CF29479FF1CDC8046E150306A7A2@039-SN1MPN1-004.039d.mgd.msft.net>
On 01/18/2011 02:21 PM, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
>> Documentation/powerpc/dts-bindings/mpic.txt | 78
>
> This is really the binding for an open-pic interrupt controller
> and I think the name should reflect that-- open-pic.txt.
Yup, agreed.
>> +This binding specifies what properties and child nodes must be
>> +available on the device tree representation of the "MPIC" interrupt
>> +controller. This binding is based on the binding defined for Open PIC
>> +in [1] and is a superset of that binding.
>
> I think it would be better to base this on the ePAPR binding which
> was based on the original chrp binding. Properties like "name"
> and "device_type" are deprecated not being used in flat device trees.
>
> <http://www.power.org/resources/downloads/Power_ePAPR_APPROVED_v1.0.pdf>
>
> The proposed new properties really should go back into the ePAPR.
I read portions of ePAPR while writing this binding and considered that.
My only worry was that ePAPR is focused on embedded systems and this
binding will have to cover non-embedded systems that exist in the
kernel. However, perhaps that is not a legitimate concern?
>> +
>> +** Required properties:
>> +
>> + NOTE: Many of these descriptions were paraphrased from [1] to aid
>> + readability.
>> +
>> + - name : Specifies the name of the MPIC.
>
> Drop this. No DTS files use it.
Done.
>> + - device_type : Specifies the device type of this MPIC. The value
>> + of this
>> + property shall be "open-pic".
>
> device_type is deprecated, since this is not real open-firmware. In
> practice the kernel is matching on device_type, but we want to move
> away from that to match on "compatible", just hasn't been implemented
> yet.
I will drop this property with the expectation that the kernel will be
fixed. From a quick grep of '.../arch/powerpc' it looks like most uses
are of the form:
np = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, "open-pic");
if (np == NULL)
return;
In most of these cases I suppose the 'of_find_node_by_type' calls could
just be replaced with calls to 'of_find_compatible_node(NULL, "open-pic")'.
>> + - reg : Specifies the base physical address(s) and size(s) of this
>> + MPIC's
>> + addressable register space.
>> + - compatible : Specifies the compatibility list for the MPIC. The
>> + property
>> + value shall include "chrp,open-pic".
>
> In the ePAPR we modified this to just "open-pic", because this has
> nothing to do with chrp anymore. I think just "open-pic" is
> what we want.
OK, but as a migration path we should allow the kernel to accept both
(Scott mentioned this in another reply), but "open-pic" is the
documented correct way.
>> + - interrupt-controller : The presence of this property identifies
>> + the node
>> + as a MPIC. No property value should be
>> defined.
>> + - #address-cells : Specifies the number of cells needed to encode an
>> + address. The value of this property shall always
>> + be 0
>> + so that 'interrupt-map' nodes do not have to
>> + specify a
>> + parent unit address.
>> + - #interrupt-cells : Specifies the number of cells needed to encode
>> + an
>> + interrupt source.
>
> Should be 2, correct?
Yup.
>> +** Optional properties:
>> +
>> + - no-reset : The presence of this property indicates that the MPIC
>> + should not be reset during runtime initialization.
>> + - protected-sources : Specifies a list of interrupt sources that are
>> + not
>> + available for use and whose corresponding
>> + vectors
>> + should not be initialized. A typical use case
>> + for
>> + this property is in AMP systems where multiple
>> + independent operating systems need to share
>> + the MPIC
>> + without clobbering each other.
>
> I do think you need to include the definition of interrupt
> specifiers here. Feel free to cut/paste text from my
> Freescale mpic binding.
OK, I will look into that. Thanks.
--
Meador Inge | meador_inge AT mentor.com
Mentor Embedded | http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-19 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-18 0:52 [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: document the MPIC device tree binding Meador Inge
2011-01-18 20:31 ` Scott Wood
[not found] ` <AANLkTi=QX4BfLvPfQDMOgmh90TtX4MQqio6AOZR8JKas@mail.gmail.com>
2011-01-18 20:21 ` Yoder Stuart-B08248
2011-01-19 20:24 ` Meador Inge [this message]
2011-01-19 20:38 ` Yoder Stuart-B08248
2011-01-19 22:14 ` Yoder Stuart-B08248
2011-01-20 0:08 ` Meador Inge
2011-01-20 15:50 ` Yoder Stuart-B08248
2011-01-27 23:50 ` Meador Inge
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=4D374899.20402@mentor.com \
--to=meador_inge@mentor.com \
--cc=B08248@freescale.com \
--cc=Hollis_Blanchard@mentor.com \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).