On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 11:24:18PM +1100, David Gibson wrote: > No, you suggested it be a global property of the interrupt source. > Same problem, just less so.
Cite? > > Not in the real world, in the real world we don't have device tree > > bindings for most of the interrupt controllers out there and therefore > > no code exists to parse them. There's a fairly small set of current > > systems using device tree and a very large set of systems which have > > never used it before and are currently working on implementing it. > If we support the PIC at all, it must know how to determine the > interrupt types. When DT support is added to the PIC, that will > include determining the type from the interrupt specifiers. If we > don't support the PIC, we don't care. *sigh* We do care because as I say in the paragraph you quote above people are trying to roll device tree out onto new platforms. The coverage on PowerPC and SPARC is near 100% but the coverage on ARM is very far away from that so we're going to have to create a large number of new bindings. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
