[RFC][PATCH 6/8] Walnut DTS

[Segher Boessenkool]

>> Yes indeed.  The problem with your suggested "obvious way"
>
> I said it was obvious, not obviously correct. :-)

I know :-)

>> is that you wouldn't get a unit address included if your
>> interrupt-map points (for some entry) at your device tree
>> parent, either.  Not all that hypothetical.
>
> Ah, good point.  My inclination would be to, rather than check how  
> we got to the node, check whether it's the device's parent.  If  
> not, then the presence of #address-cells (other than zero for  
> compatibility) is an error.  Otherwise, #address-cells is used, and  
> defaults are handled the same as with reg/ranges translation.

This might work; it is less flexible than the actual interrupt
mapping definition though (and such flexibility is good, as long
as you don't abuse it ;-) ).  Anyway, we're stuck with the actual
current imap recommended practice.  It might not be perfect but
it does work, is proven in the field, and is the standard.


Segher