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.