From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934832AbcATRDD (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:03:03 -0500
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:46592 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752348AbcATRCo (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:02:44 -0500
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 17:02:20 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com>
Cc: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Sebastian Frias <sf84@laposte.net>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] irqchip: Add support for Tango interrupt
 controller
Message-ID: <20160120170219.GC28169@leverpostej>
References: <569CE0F2.1060507@sigmadesigns.com>
 <569D0B80.1010908@sigmadesigns.com>
 <569D165E.4060004@sigmadesigns.com>
 <569FAFF5.4090909@arm.com>
 <yw1xr3hcqlix.fsf@unicorn.mansr.com>
 <569FB4AE.8000506@sigmadesigns.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <569FB4AE.8000506@sigmadesigns.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 05:24:14PM +0100, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> On 20/01/2016 17:10, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> 
> > Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > 
> >>> +	if (of_property_read_u32(node, "reg", &ctl))
> >>> +		panic("%s: failed to get reg base", node->name);
> >>> +
> >>> +	chip = kzalloc(sizeof(*chip), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>> +	chip->ctl = ctl;
> >>> +	chip->base = base;
> > 
> > As I said before, this assumes the outer DT node uses a ranges
> > property.  Normally reg properties work the same whether they specify an
> > offset within an outer "ranges" or have a full address directly.  It
> > would be easy enough to make this work with either, so I don't see any
> > reason not to.
> 
> IIRC, I was told very early in the review process that the ranges prop
> was mandatory. Lemme look for it... It was Arnd:
> 
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/444131/focus=444207

I believe Arnd's point was that you need _a_ ranges property, rather
than specifically requiring an idmap/empty ranges property.

As Marc pointed out, you can use of_iomap on the child nodes to map the
portions described by the reg properties, which will handle any
ranges-based translation automatically.

When you put together the binding document, please point out that the
ranges property is necessary.

Thanks,
Mark.