From: Tim Bird <tbird20d@gmail.com>
To: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of/irq: lookup 'interrupts-extended' property first
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 14:50:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+bK7J7LQq4S70ScSynbLTjNMmP=9n3KD2suYRg9JN+pEv-Y7g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140806201256.GO3711@ld-irv-0074>
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Brian Norris
<computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 01:42:08PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:00:01AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> > I think it is important that a device tree provide some flexibility on
>> > kernel versions. We only invented 'interrupts-extended' in Linux 3.13,
>> > so it's easy to have device trees that could work only on 3.13+.
>> >
>> > Typically, we might say that new features require new kernels, but this
>> > is a very basic piece of the DT infrastructure. In our case, we have
>> > hardware whose basic features can be supported by a single interrupt
>> > parent, and so we used the 'interrupts' property pre-3.13. But when we
>> > want to add some power management features, there's an additional
>> > interrupt parent. Under the current DT binding, we have to switch over
>> > to using 'interrupts-extended' exclusively, and thus we must have a
>> > completely new DTB for >=3.13, and this DTB no longer works with the old
>> > kernels.
>>
>> "Must have" to enable the new features?
>
> Yes. The new feature requires an additional interrupt parent, and so it
> requires interrupts-extended.
Hold on there. What about interrupt-map? That was the traditional DT
feature for
supporting multi-parented interrupts. Why couldn't the feature have been added
using that instead of interrupts-extended?
I know interrupts-extended is preferred, but has interrupt-map support been
removed from recent kernels? I'm a bit confused.
-- Tim Bird
Senior Software Engineer, Sony Mobile
Architecture Group Chair, CE Workgroup, Linux Foundation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-06 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-19 23:33 [PATCH] of/irq: lookup 'interrupts-extended' property first Florian Fainelli
2014-07-31 18:00 ` Florian Fainelli
2014-08-06 16:54 ` Brian Norris
2014-08-06 18:42 ` Rob Herring
2014-08-06 20:12 ` Brian Norris
2014-08-06 21:50 ` Tim Bird [this message]
2014-08-06 22:12 ` Florian Fainelli
2014-08-15 12:56 ` Grant Likely
2014-08-06 22:24 ` Rob Herring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CA+bK7J7LQq4S70ScSynbLTjNMmP=9n3KD2suYRg9JN+pEv-Y7g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=tbird20d@gmail.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).