lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: dt: mailbox: Add TI Message Manager
From
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> wrote:
>> On 02/08/2016 10:14 PM, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>

>>>> +
>>> I think we should get rid of consumer specifics from the provider node...
>>
>>
>> If I get rid of the consumer nodes, how do you propose I describe the rx
>> queue interrupt(s) in the msmgr dt node (Every Rx queue will have it's
>> own interrupt - and it cannot be reverse computed from queue ID, proxy ID)?
>>
> One option is to have controller driver construct interrupt name from
> queue and proxy ids like
>
> msgmgr: msgmgr@02a00000 {
> ....
> interrupt-names = "irq_5_2", "irq_0_0"; /* irq_<queue-id>_<proxy-id> */
> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 324 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> <GIC_SPI 325 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> }
>
> and have the consumer specify queue and proxy ids in mboxes property like
> pmmc {
> ....
> mbox-names = "tx", "rx";
> mboxes = <&msgmgr 0 0>
> <&msgmgr 5 2>;
> };
>
However if the queue+proxy+interrupt tuple is a hard property of a
channel (which it seems to me now), then probably your original scheme
of chile node phandle is just as fine.

Thanks

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-02-09 17:21    [W:0.088 / U:4.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site