RE: [PATCH 3/3] First cut at PReP support for arch/powerpc

3 messages, 3 authors, 2007-08-06 · open the first message on its own page

RE: [PATCH 3/3] First cut at PReP support for arch/powerpc

From: Yoder Stuart-B08248 <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-03 21:55:20

quoted
quoted
quoted
+		MPIC: interrupt-controller@d {
+			device_type =3D "open-pic";
=20
device_type =3D "interrupt-controller".
=20
Not according to the binding in booting-without-of.txt
=20
My understanding here, though possibly flawed, is that the current
implementation has "open-pic" but _should_ have "interrupt-controller"
as that is the officially correct name.
=20
I _think_ this means we need a transitional period where we update
the code to look for "interrupt-controller", and obsoletedly, looks
for the "open-pic", while we transition to the new, correct name.
"open-pic" is the correct value for the device_type property.
See the binding at:
http://playground.sun.com/1275/bindings/chrp/chrp1_8a.ps
That is the definition for open pic interrupt controllers (AFAIK).

I am not aware of any official binding with "interrupt-controller"=20
as the device_type.

However, the interrupt mapping spec says that all interrupt
controller (regardless of device_type) must have a=20
property named "interrupt-controller" to identify
the device node as an interrupt controller and root of
a interrupt tree.
See: http://playground.sun.com/1275/practice/imap/imap0_9d.html

Stuart

Re: [PATCH 3/3] First cut at PReP support for arch/powerpc

From: David Gibson <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-06 04:02:49

On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:55:16PM -0700, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+		MPIC: interrupt-controller@d {
+			device_type = "open-pic";

device_type = "interrupt-controller".
Not according to the binding in booting-without-of.txt
My understanding here, though possibly flawed, is that the current
implementation has "open-pic" but _should_ have "interrupt-controller"
as that is the officially correct name.

I _think_ this means we need a transitional period where we update
the code to look for "interrupt-controller", and obsoletedly, looks
for the "open-pic", while we transition to the new, correct name.
"open-pic" is the correct value for the device_type property.
See the binding at:
http://playground.sun.com/1275/bindings/chrp/chrp1_8a.ps
That is the definition for open pic interrupt controllers (AFAIK).

I am not aware of any official binding with "interrupt-controller" 
as the device_type.
That's what I thought.
However, the interrupt mapping spec says that all interrupt
controller (regardless of device_type) must have a 
property named "interrupt-controller" to identify
the device node as an interrupt controller and root of
a interrupt tree.
See: http://playground.sun.com/1275/practice/imap/imap0_9d.html
Ah, yes.  Added to both the mpic and 8259.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

Re: [PATCH 3/3] First cut at PReP support for arch/powerpc

From: Segher Boessenkool <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-06 19:45:01

quoted
However, the interrupt mapping spec says that all interrupt
controller (regardless of device_type) must have a
property named "interrupt-controller" to identify
the device node as an interrupt controller and root of
a interrupt tree.
See: http://playground.sun.com/1275/practice/imap/imap0_9d.html
Ah, yes.  Added to both the mpic and 8259.
See?  Even if I make mistakes some good comes from it!

;-) ;-) ;-)


Segher
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help