[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160819143641.GA19513@rob-hp-laptop>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:36:42 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] gpio: dt-bindings: Add documentation for Aspeed
GPIO controllers
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:14:10PM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>
> ---
>
> Since v1:
>
> Rob: I haven't added your Acked-by here as I've made the following changes and
> wanted to get your input:
>
> * Remove interrupt-controller as an optional property
> * Defer to interrupt-controller bindings document for sub-node properties
>
> I had a discussion with Joel about whether the interrupt-controller capability
> should be optional and the conclusion was that it should always be configured
> by the driver. This makes an optional interrupt-controller property feel
> redundant (and possibly inaccurate if left out) so I've removed it.
I don't follow. What do you mean byt "configured by the driver". If the
block supports interrupts, then it should be marked as an
interrupt-controller. It never should have been optional. The OS can
ignore the interrupt properties if it chooses.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists