On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:52:21 +0000,
"Lad, Prabhakar" [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 6:33 PM Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
interrupts would work just fine here:
interrupts = <GIC_SPI 4 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 5 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 6 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 7 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 8 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 10 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 11 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
We don't need a different solution for N:1 interrupts from N:M. Sure,
that could become unweldy if there are a lot of interrupts (just like
interrupt-map), but is that an immediate problem?
It's just that with this approach the driver will have to index the
interrupts instead of reading from DT.
Marc - is it OK with the above approach?
Anything that uses standard properties in a standard way works for me.
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.