On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday 30 May 2013, Grant Likely wrote: >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Since a platform device only has one "interrupt-parent", as soon as >> > one of the interrupts can get mapped, I would expect that the controller >> > is present, and we don't need to defer the probing any more. >> >> If it goes through an interrupt map node then it may only be able to >> resolve a subset. > > Right, so we clearly need it. I also though of a second case, which > is that the xlate() function might itself return -EPROBE_DEFER in > the case that the irqchip driver is registered but e.g. not the > parent of a cascaded irqchip.
That shouldn't happen. If the parent isn't registered, then how can the child set itself up? g. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
