On 13/07/15 05:29, Linus Walleij wrote:

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Gregory Fong [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Some brcmstb GPIO controllers can be used to wake from suspend, so use
the de facto standard property 'wakeup-source' to mark the nodes of
controllers with that capability.

Also document interrupts-extended, which will be used for wakeup
handling because the interrupt parent for the wake IRQ is different
from the regular IRQ.

While we're at it, a few more fixes: We don't actually use the
"interrupt-names" property, so remove it from the listed optional
properties and from the examples.  And since we're modifying the
examples, also follow Brian's suggestions to:
- change #gpio-cells, #interrupt-cells, and brcm,gpio-bank-widths from
  hex to dec
- use phandles

Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Gregory Fong <redacted>
---
v3: Update per Brian's suggestions described in above message.

I'm very uncertain regarding these interrupts-extended etc.

Gregory's additions to the binding are correct and comply with how the
'interrupts-extended' property is meant to be used. FYI, this is
required because most wake-up capable HW on brcmstb chips have N
interrupts feeding to a GIC, but their wake-up interrupt(s) feed to an
always-on interrupt controller. With the 'interrupts' +
'interrupt-parent' property, you can "cross" multiple interrupt domains.

The precedence and rules for interpreting the "legacy" interrupts
property vs. interrupts-extended is documented in the tree.

Can someone who understands that ACK this?

Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>

E.g. Grant Likely, Bj?rn Helgaas, Rob Herring.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

-- 
Florian