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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <9cd4b818-905c-08a4-5675-a5ee763cea98@ti.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 09:54:24 +0530 From: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com> To: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> CC: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <jason@...edaemon.net>, Linux ARM Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Device Tree Mailing List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>, Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>, Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/12] dt-bindings: irqchip: Introduce TISCI Interrupt router bindings On 11/04/19 8:30 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > Hi, > > * Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com> [190410 04:15]: >> +Example: >> +-------- >> +The following example demonstrates both interrupt router node and the consumer >> +node(main gpio) on the AM654 SoC: >> + >> +main_intr: interrupt-controller0 { >> + compatible = "ti,sci-intr"; >> + ti,intr-trigger-type = <1>; >> + interrupt-controller; >> + interrupt-parent = <&gic500>; >> + #interrupt-cells = <3>; >> + ti,sci = <&dmsc>; >> + ti,sci-dst-id = <56>; >> + ti,sci-rm-range-girq = <0x1>; >> +}; > > To me it seems there should not be too many of these interrupt > controller nodes for each SoC. Maybe you're already planning on > doing it, but I suggest that you just add more specific compatibles > and then look up the dst-id from a mapping table in the driver > similar to what patch 04/12 in this series is already doing. > > That way you don't need to add custom TI specific (firmware > defined) device tree properties listed above ;) I am tired of arguing on this. We did close this topic in the previous version of this series. Why do you want to keep re visiting the same. Sorry, I am not going change unless I receive a Nack from Marc or Rob. Thanks and regards, Lokesh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists