From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760416AbbJ3TF3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:05:29 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:45498 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753304AbbJ3TF1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:05:27 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 19:05:14 +0000 From: Mark Rutland To: Timur Tabi Cc: Fu Wei , Linaro ACPI Mailman List , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Wei Fu , Arnd Bergmann , Guenter Roeck , Vipul Gandhi , Wim Van Sebroeck , Jon Masters , Leo Duran , Jon Corbet , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Rafael Wysocki , Dave Young , Pratyush Anand , Suravee Suthikulpanit , Rob Herring Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] Documentation: add sbsa-gwdt driver documentation Message-ID: <20151030190514.GD30791@leverpostej> References: <1445961999-9506-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <1445961999-9506-2-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> <20151027162257.GJ3091@leverpostej> <5633BCA4.1050400@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5633BCA4.1050400@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 01:53:24PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: > On 10/30/2015 01:35 PM, Fu Wei wrote: > >>I think maybe Mark was asking why WS1 is optional, not the WS1 > >My answer is for "why WS1 is optional"! > > > >>>interrupt. Maybe you can reword the documentation to make is clear > >>>that > >I didn't say : "only the*interrupt* for WS1 is optional." > > WS1 itself is not optional. The spec says that WS0 and WS1 are > separate events, and doesn't saying anything about either being > optional. The *interrupt* for WS1, however, is optional. This is a moot point. The distintion between the signal and the interrupt doens't matter here. I was only asking why the interrupt was optional, and it seems per the spec it's expected to be handed to an agent at a higher exception level. That implies that the OS should only care about WS0, assuming that I've understood correctly. Thanks, Mark.