lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: How to create IRQ mappings in a GPIO driver that doesn't control its IRQ domain ?
Date
On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:22:29 +0200, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Thursday 25 July 2013 14:15:56 Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:45:33AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > The two devices are independent, so there's no real parent/child
> > > relationship. However, as Grant proposed, I could list all the interrupts
> > > associated with GPIOs in the GPIO controller DT node. I would then just
> > > call irq_of_parse_and_map() in the .to_irq() handler to magically
> > > translate the GPIO number to a mapped IRQ number.
> > >
> > > The number of interrupts can be pretty high (up to 58 in the worst case so
> > > far), so an alternative would be to specify the interrupt-parent only, and
> > > call irq_create_of_mapping() directly. What solution would you prefer ?
> >
> > Are the interrupts in a contiguous block in the controller so you can just
> > pass around the controller and a base number?
>
> In two of the three SoCs I need to fix they are. I've just realized that in
> the last one the interrupts are in two contiguous blocks in two different
> parents. I will thus need at least a list of <parent-phandle base count>. Our
> standard interrupt bindings don't seem to support multiple parents,

You can actually do it by using a dummy node with interrupt-map and
interrupt-map-mask properties, but it is a pretty ugly solution in my
opinion.

> is that
> something that we want to fix or should I go for custom bindings ?

Yes, I think it is something that we want to fix. Jean-Christophe was
going to propose an alternative to the interrupts property which allows
an array of <phandle interrupt-specifier> tuples, but I've not seen
anything yet. Go ahead and make a proposal.

You could try to encode a base+count variant, but honestly I don't think
it would be a good idea because it only would work with a very narrow
set of use cases. Consider if #interrupt-cells was set to 2. Which cell
gets incremented in the range of interrupts specified? Better I think to
merely have an array of fully specified irqs. Support for that property
could be transparently baked into the core interrupt parsing functions.

g.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-28 07:21    [W:0.075 / U:0.880 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site