From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752862AbeBGB6Q (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Feb 2018 20:58:16 -0500 Received: from mailgw01.mediatek.com ([210.61.82.183]:5003 "EHLO mailgw01.mediatek.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751558AbeBGB6O (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Feb 2018 20:58:14 -0500 X-UUID: 2643ce14cd3c4b27bcc519ec5eef8b5e-20180207 Message-ID: <1517968688.31641.12.camel@mtkswgap22> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] of_pci_irq: add a check to fallback to standard device tree parsing From: Ryder Lee To: Arnd Bergmann , Benjamin Herrenschmidt CC: "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Arnd Bergmann , , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , , Bjorn Helgaas , Frank Rowand , "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2018 09:58:08 +0800 In-Reply-To: <1517956309.2312.172.camel@kernel.crashing.org> References: <31c765c53e85e41bfc001d110d69e46c9967f4e7.1516961656.git.ryder.lee@mediatek.com> <1517563970.24622.9.camel@mtkswgap22> <1517866584.2312.140.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <1517884738.16010.27.camel@mtkswgap22> <1517889903.2312.151.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <1517891471.20869.6.camel@mtkswgap22> <1517892624.2312.167.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <1517895732.23319.21.camel@mtkswgap22> <1517956309.2312.172.camel@kernel.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MTK: N Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Arnd On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 09:31 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 13:42 +0800, Ryder Lee wrote: > > Thanks for explanation. > > > > So I guess the better way to achieve my aim - one IRQ per slot that is > > connected to all INTx and get propagated through the bridges (and for > > those root ports own interrupts (PME ..)} is to add interrupt-map > > properties in both parent and root port nodes. > > > > Something like this: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9970923// ,right? > > Yup. > > Cheers, > Ben. > Do you have any thoughts on the original approach? If you are okay with it, I will resend the DT patch. Thanks.