From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756041Ab1ILXUm (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:20:42 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22174 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755668Ab1ILXUk (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:20:40 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/24] C6X: devicetree From: Mark Salter To: Grant Likely Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:20:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110912201102.GF23345@ponder.secretlab.ca> References: <1314826019-22330-1-git-send-email-msalter@redhat.com> <1314826019-22330-7-git-send-email-msalter@redhat.com> <20110912201102.GF23345@ponder.secretlab.ca> Organization: Red Hat, Inc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1315869636.11280.26.camel@deneb.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 14:11 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 05:26:41PM -0400, Mark Salter wrote: > > + interrupt-controller; > > + #interrupt-cells = <1>; > > + compatible = "ti,c64x+core-pic"; > > The interrupt controller isn't addressable? Is it integrated into > the CPU? Yes, that core controller is controlled through registers accessed with special-purpose instructions, not MMIO. Other controllers, like megamodule and some as-yet unimplemented use MMIO. > > > + }; > > + > > + soc@00000000 { > > "soc@2a80000" to match the 'reg' property of this node. Okay, I think I need a separate node for that reg property. The SoC address space does actually start at 0. The registers in that reg property are "SoC-level" registers holding silicon revision, pin strap status, etc. All of the SoCs have a "device state config" node which have registers like that. Instead of having them in the device state block, this SoC has them in a separate area. I just got lazy and put them the reg property in the soc node, but I think it really calls for a separate node. --Mark