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 S1757008Ab3K0OSO (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 27 Nov 2013 09:18:14 -0500
Received: from mail-ea0-f177.google.com ([209.85.215.177]:55366 "EHLO
	mail-ea0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756846Ab3K0ORy (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 27 Nov 2013 09:17:54 -0500
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 9/9] of/irq: create interrupts-extended property
To: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>
Cc: Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEgOgz4yhDzy_BFiotK5Qi48sczR3PL1oPjPhNYC9O94P6AnzQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1381869563-16083-1-git-send-email-grant.likely@linaro.org> < CAEgOgz5BWzo-LGddjG6ZUtKt6GHxLmDUEndFOdVrn+1HTPvpGQ@mail.gmail.com> < 20131124213212.226B8C402C3@trevor.secretlab.ca> < CAEgOgz4yhDzy_BFiotK5Qi48sczR3PL1oPjPhNYC9O94P6AnzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 14:17:50 +0000
Message-Id: <20131127141750.B666EC404EC@trevor.secretlab.ca>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:06:35 +1000, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:04:52 +1000, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 09:17:01 +1000, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >> >> It's going to get a little verbose once you start making multiple
> >> >> connections as you need one mux per wire. Perhaps it could be cleaned
> >> >> up by making the foo_irq_mux node(s) a child of foo?
> >> >
> >> > It could, but then you need some way of attaching a driver to that node,
> >> > and that would require building knowledge into the driver again.
> >> >
> >> > Can you boil it down to a couple of concrete examples? What is a
> >> > specific example of how the platform should decide which interrupt line
> >> > to use?
> >> >
> >>
> >> So i've spent some time playing with this. I now have a booting kernel
> >> with multiple root interrupt controllers and peripheral devices
> >> multiply-connected to both root controllers. But only one on of the
> >> controllers is used by Linux (as linux being able to use multiple
> >> intcs is a non-trivial problem). So the scheme I am using is to have
> >> one of these root intc's marked as disabled via
> >
> > Multiple intc's should be a solved problem. What issue are you seeing?
> > Or is this a microblaze specific problem?
> >
> 
> It's multiple root (i.e. have no explicit parent) interrupt
> controllers. And linux
> doesnt respect status = "disabled" for interrupt controllers at all it seems.

That can be fixed.  :-)

g.