[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMgXwTg9f_i00GFiAfkb7zCzyxjGvRbd9Hrt2gbQwwLb4-F6Yg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:31:55 -0700
From: Wesley Terpstra <wesley@...ive.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Albert Ou <albert@...ive.com>, patches@...ups.riscv.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/17] dts: include documentation for the RISC-V interrupt controllers
I've reread the relevant sections now, and you are correct. We should
remove the address-cells from the PLIC's dts.
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Wesley Terpstra <wesley@...ive.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
>>>> > +RISC-V Hart-Level Interrupt Controller (HLIC)
>>>> > +---------------------------------------------
>
> [...]
>
>>>> > + plic: interrupt-controller@...0000 {
>>>> > + #address-cells = <0>;
>>>
>>> This can go, given you don't have sub-nodes, nor a #size-cells property.
>>
>> The device-tree-specification seems to indicate that this is mandatory
>> for an interrupt-controller. Or have I understood this wrongly? When
>> you use interrupts-extended, doesn't it use the address-cells of the
>> interrupt controller? We should add that size-cells = 0, though.
>
> It's only needed if you have an interrupt-map property AIUI.
> #size-cells should never be needed (unless you have child nodes of
> this one).
>
> Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists