On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 01:22:29AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Guennadi, > > On Monday 08 April 2013 14:15:39 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Monday 08 April 2013 13:25:46 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2013, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > > On Monday 08 April 2013 10:08:40 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > > > Most Renesas irqpin controllers have 4-bit sense fields, however, > > > > > > some have different widths. This patch adds a DT binding to > > > > > > optionally specify such non-standard values. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > v3: move the code to a common location, where device configuration > > > > > > parameters are retrieved > > > > > > > > > > > > .../interrupt-controller/renesas,intc-irqpin.txt | 13 +++++++++ > > > > > > drivers/irqchip/irq-renesas-intc-irqpin.c | 4 ++++ > > > > > > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > > create mode 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,intc- > > > > > > irqpin.txt > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt- > > > > > > controller/renesas,intc-irqpin.txt > > > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/ > > > > > > renesas,intc-irqpin.txt > > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > > index 0000000..c6f09b7 > > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > > +++ > > > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,int > > > > > > c- > > > > > > irqpin.txt > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ > > > > > > +DT bindings for the R-/SH-Mobile irqpin controller > > > > > > + > > > > > > +Required properties: > > > > > > + > > > > > > +- compatible: has to be "renesas,intc-irqpin" > > > > > > +- #interrupt-cells: has to be <2> > > > > > > + > > > > > > +Optional properties: > > > > > > + > > > > > > +- any properties, listed in interrupts.txt in this directory, and > > > > > > any standard > > > > > > + resource allocation properties > > > > > > +- sense-bitfield-width: width of a single sense bitfield in the > > > > > > SENSE register, > > > > > > + if different from the default 4 bits > > > > > > > > > > Wouldn't it be better to define per-SoC compatible strings, and infer > > > > > the sense bitfield width from that ? > > > > > > > > This is not a boolean, it is an integer, I don't think defining > > > > compatibility strings for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,... bits is better than having > > > > one integer property. > > > > > > I'm not advocating for compatibility strings for a given number of bits, > > > but for per-SoC compatibility strings from which to infer the width. > > > > > > For instance, if the r8a7779 has a 6-bit sense field, you would use > > > > > > compatible = "r8a7779,intc-irqpin"; > > > > > > and map that to 6 in the irqpin driver. > > > > I understand what you mean, still I don't think mapping N SoC-compatibility > > strings to various values of a single integer is better than having a single > > property. > > The way I understand (or maybe rather feel) the DT bindings philosophy is > that > hardware information for on-SoC IP cores that depend on the IP core version > should be conveyed through the compatible property. I might be wrong though.
That is also my understanding. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
