Re: Subject: L2x0 OF properties do not include interrupt #

Will Deacon
2011-08-10T14:28:41Z

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:24:27PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 August 2011, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 02:59:12PM +0100, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > I think you should allow for either the single irq or individual irqs.
> > > You can specify that the event counter interrupt must be first, then the
> > > pmu driver could work either way ignoring the rest. The driver probably
> > > needs to mark the handler as shared if there is only the combined
> > > interrupt unless you expect all interrupts to be handled by 1 driver.
> >
> > I much prefer having seperate, individual IRQs with no requirement on
> > ordering.
> >
>
> What do you mean with 'no requirement on ordering'? If we have multiple
> interrupt sources, we definitely want to identify which one calls which
> handler, and the only information we have is the position in the array
> of interrupt numbers.

I was hoping that it was possible to have separate properties which describe
the interrupt. So you could have something like pmu-interrupt <75> and
abort-interrupt <76> rather than interrupts <75, 76>.

I've not played with DT bindings before though, so if it's usually done with
an ordered list then so be it!

Will