On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 09:38:47AM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Thierry Reding,
>
> Thanks for your feedback!
>
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 08:58:10 +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>
> > That sounds very much like one of the use-cases that were discussed. The
> > easiest solution would probably be to add an API to look up an MSI chip
> > from a DT phandle, so that the PCIe controller's device node could have
> > it as a property, somewhat like this:
> >
> > msi: interrupt-controller {
> > };
> >
> > pcie-controller {
> > ...
> > marvell,msi = <&msi>;
> > ...
> > };
>
> I'm not sure how to handle this msi interrupt controller with the main
> interrupt controller. For now, I have:
>
> mpic: interrupt-controller@d0020000 {
> reg = <0xd0020a00 0x2d0>,
> <0xd0021070 0x58>;
> };
>
> [...]
>
> soc {
> interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
> [...]
> };
>
> And the MSI interrupt controller shares the same registers as the MPIC.
> So should it be something like:
>
> interrupt-controller {
> reg = <0xd0020a00 0x2d0>,
> <0xd0021070 0x58>;
>
> mpic {
> /* Not sure what to have here */
> };
>
> msi {
>
> /* Here either */
> };
> };
>
> soc {
> interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
>
> pcie-controller {
> marvell,msi = <&msi>;
> };
> };
>
> Or some other idea?
I think you can just make this:
mpic: interrupt-controller@d0020000 {
...
};
...
soc {
pcie-controller {
marvell,msi = <&mpic>;
};
};
And everything else should just work given the APIs I mentioned. But as
you said it'd be good if somebody else could share their opinion about
this.
Thierry
pgp9nkpr9m8BV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
