Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 09:41:14AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
+ 8...@60 {
+ device_type = "8042";
+ reg = <1 0x00000060 0x00000001
+ 1 0x00000064 0x00000001>;
+ // IRQ1, IRQ12 (rising edge)
+ interrupts = <1 3 12 3>;
For the flattened device tree, I think we've settled on the convention
that every node with an IRQ connection should have both the
interrupt-parent and interrupts properties. (ie. don't rely on the
parent node's interrupt-parent property.)
Why?
Defensive programming. To not rely on implicit relationships
It doesn't seem any more likely to introduce a fault by specifying the
interrupt controller in one place than in many places.
-Scott
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
