Problem with OF interrupt parsing code

[Segher Boessenkool]

>> This is an interrupt controller (it has an "interrupt-controller"
>> property, and it has no interrupt parent (there is no 
>> "interrupt-parent"
>> property, for interrupt controllers you do not follow the "normal" 
>> tree
>> parent), so it is the root interrupt controller and there is no loop.
>>
>> It seems from your description that the Linux code is using the tree
>> parent as interrupt parent even for interrupt controller nodes.  This
>> is wrong behaviour.
>
> It shoudn't normally happen. The reason it -does- happen in fact is 
> that
> the above node is also missing the #interrupt-cells property, which
> cause the parent-lookup routine to skip it before it gets a chance to
> see that there's an "interrupt-controller" property in there.
>
> I'm not sure whether linux behaviour is a bug or not since I believe we
> are clearly in undefined-land as an interrupt controller should always
> have a #interrupt-cells property.

That isn't required for legacy (pieces of) trees that don't go
through an interrupt-map, actually (but strongly recommended of
course) -- and I'm not sure how valid a tree that uses the imap
recommended practice for only part of the tree is really ;-)

Either way, the Linux code should use the explicit information (the
lack of "interrupt-parent" in a node with "interrupt-controller")
to determine whether a node is the root interrupt controller, instead
of some implicit information.  You can then more clearly do sanity
checking on "#interrupt-cells" etc.


Segher