On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 05:23:07PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > > And we reject that driver approach for good reason and are now > > doing the architectualy low-level irq handling in common code > > without any need whatsover to duplicate information in the > > privileged spec in DT. > > In other words, the whole idea of separate RISCV local interrupt > controller driver was dropped due duplicate information in privilege > spec DT ??
No. We came to the conflusion that a few registers on a cpu that allow enabling/disabling local vs external vs timer intterupts aren't worth writing an irqchip (or DT entries) for.
