Re: [PATCH 06/12] riscv: dts: allwinner: Add the D1 SoC base devicetree

From: <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>
To: <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: <andre.przywara@arm.com>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>, <samuel@sholland.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
	<prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>, <wens@csie.org>,
	<robh+dt@kernel.org>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] riscv: dts: allwinner: Add the D1 SoC base devicetree
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 13:56:27 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <44b6f601-1a11-aacf-5592-5b61550afb9f@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdWWbR+Y=bJ7gdqV3d+ffHE1-hwQf-Owb8FAvZAaScdOgA@mail.gmail.com>

On 22/08/2022 13:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 

>> Do you think this is worth doing? Or are you just providing an
>> example of what could be done?
> 
> Just some brainstorming...
> 
>> Where would you envisage putting these macros? I forget the order
>> of the CPP operations that are done, can they be put in the dts?
> 
> The SOC_PERIPHERAL_IRQ() macro should be defined in the
> ARM-based SoC.dtsi file and the RISC-V-based SoC.dtsi file.

Right, one level up but ~the same result.

>>> Nice! But it's gonna be a very large interrupt-map.
>>
>> I quite like the idea of not duplicating files across the archs
>> if it can be helped, but not at the expense of making them hard to
>> understand & I feel like unfortunately the large interrupt map is
>> in that territory.
> 
> I feel the same.
> Even listing both interrupt numbers in SOC_PERIPHERAL_IRQ(na, nr)
> is a risk for making mistakes.
> 
> So personally, I'm in favor of teaching dtc arithmetic, so we can
> handle the offset in SOC_PERIPHERAL_IRQ().

Yup, in the same boat here. mayb I'll get bored enough to bite..