lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [RFC 5/5] powerpc/fsl: Add supported-irq-ranges for P2020
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 2:44 AM
> To: Bharat Bhushan <bharat.bhushan@nxp.com>;
> benh@kernel.crashing.org; paulus@samba.org; mpe@ellerman.id.au;
> galak@kernel.crashing.org; mark.rutland@arm.com;
> kstewart@linuxfoundation.org; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org;
> devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: robh@kernel.org; keescook@chromium.org; tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com;
> joe@perches.com
> Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] powerpc/fsl: Add supported-irq-ranges for P2020
>
> On Fri, 2018-07-27 at 15:18 +0530, Bharat Bhushan wrote:
> > MPIC on NXP (Freescale) P2020 supports following irq
> > ranges:
> > > 0 - 11 (External interrupt)
> > > 16 - 79 (Internal interrupt)
> > > 176 - 183 (Messaging interrupt)
> > > 224 - 231 (Shared message signaled interrupt)
>
> Why don't you convert to the 4-cell interrupt specifiers that make dealing
> with these ranges less error-prone?

Ok , will do if we agree to have this series as per comment on other patch.

>
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_rdb.c
> > b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_rdb.c
> > index 1006950..49ff348 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_rdb.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_rdb.c
> > @@ -57,6 +57,11 @@ void __init mpc85xx_rdb_pic_init(void)
> > MPIC_BIG_ENDIAN |
> > MPIC_SINGLE_DEST_CPU,
> > 0, 256, " OpenPIC ");
> > + } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("fsl,P2020RDB-PC")) {
> > + mpic = mpic_alloc(NULL, 0,
> > + MPIC_BIG_ENDIAN |
> > + MPIC_SINGLE_DEST_CPU,
> > + 0, 0, " OpenPIC ");
> > } else {
> > mpic = mpic_alloc(NULL, 0,
> > MPIC_BIG_ENDIAN |
>
> I don't think we want to grow a list of every single revision of every board in
> these platform files.

One other confusing observation I have is that "irq_count" from platform code is given precedence over "last-interrupt-source" in device-tree.
Should not device-tree should have precedence otherwise there is no point using " last-interrupt-source" if platform code passes "irq_count" in mpic_alloc().

Thanks
-Bharat

>
> -Scott

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-08 05:45    [W:0.083 / U:1.704 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site