[PATCH] powerpc: document new interrupt-array property
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
benh at kernel.crashing.org
Sat Feb 24 17:40:59 EST 2007
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 12:15 -0700, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
> > I'd rather write it like
> >
> > > interrupts = < a 4 b 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 >
> > > interrupt-parents = <&UIC0 &UIC0 &UIC1 &UIC1 &UIC1>
> >
>
> Segher, with your proposal here of an interrupt-parents property
> is this really keeping with the normal OF way of representing
> property values?
>
> Examples exists where one property tells you how to interpret
> or decode another (e.g. #address-cells), but your proposal we
> have two distinct properties each with values that together
> provide the complete 'value' (interrupt parent + interrupt
> specifier). Is there any precedent for this approach?
Somewhat... interrupt-map and interrupt-map-mask... that sort of thing.
> I think I'd rather see all the information encoded in
> one value.
On the other hand, I do quite like keeping with the old principle that
having interrupts == having an "interrupts" node.
Ben.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list