linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] of/irq: Drop obsolete 'interrupts' vs 'interrupts-extended' text

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:07:53 -0700
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:	"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of/irq: Drop obsolete 'interrupts' vs 'interrupts-extended'
 text

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:15 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 11:35:31PM +0000, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> a9ecdc0fdc54 ("of/irq: Fix lookup to use 'interrupts-extended' property
>> first") updated the description to say that:
>>
>>   - Both 'interrupts' and 'interrupts-extended' may be present
>>   - Software should prefer 'interrupts-extended'
>>   - Software that doesn't comprehend 'interrupts-extended' may use
>>     'interrupts'
>>
>> But there is still a paragraph at the end that prohibits having both and
>> says 'interrupts' should be preferred.
>>
>> Remove the contradictory text.
>>
>> Fixes: a9ecdc0fdc54 ("of/irq: Fix lookup to use 'interrupts-extended' property first")
>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
>> CC: stable@...r.kernel.org    # v3.13+
>> ---
>>  .../bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt   |    4 ----
>>  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt
>> index ce6a1a072028..8a3c40829899 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/interrupts.txt
>> @@ -30,10 +30,6 @@ should only be used when a device has multiple interrupt parents.
>>    Example:
>>       interrupts-extended = <&intc1 5 1>, <&intc2 1 0>;
>>
>> -A device node may contain either "interrupts" or "interrupts-extended", but not
>> -both. If both properties are present, then the operating system should log an
>> -error and use only the data in "interrupts".
>
> Why not update the binding to explain that interrupts-extended is
> typically preferred?

I'm only trying to fix the contradictory text.  It's fine with me if
somebody wants to go farther and prefer interrupts-extended (though it
does look like "interrupts" will be more concise for machines with a
single interrupt controller).

Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/