[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: irqchip: Add PRUSS interrupt controller bindings

>>> +- interrupts : all the interrupts generated towards the main host
>>> + processor in the SoC. The format depends on the
>>> + interrupt specifier for the particular SoC's ARM GIC
>>> + parent interrupt controller. A shared interrupt can
>>> + be skipped if the desired destination and usage is by
>>> + a different processor/device.
>>> +- interrupt-names : should use one of the following names for each valid
>>> + interrupt connected to ARM GIC, the name should match
>>> + the corresponding host interrupt number,
>>> + "host0", "host1", "host2", "host3", "host4",
>>> + "host5", "host6" or "host7"
>>> +- interrupt-controller : mark this node as an interrupt controller
>>> +- #interrupt-cells : should be 1. Client users shall use the PRU System
>>> + event number (the interrupt source that the client
>>> + is interested in) as the value of the interrupts
>>> + property in their node
>>> +
>>> +Optional Properties:
>>> +--------------------
>>> +The following properties are _required_ only for some SoCs. If none of the below
>>> +properties are defined, it implies that all the host interrupts 2 through 9 are
>>> +connected exclusively to the ARM GIC.
>>> +
>>> +- ti,irqs-reserved : an array of 8-bit elements of host interrupts between
>>> + 0 and 7 (corresponding to PRUSS INTC output interrupts
>>> + 2 through 9) that are not connected to the ARM GIC.
>> The reason for 0-7 mapping to 2-9 is not instantly clear to someone
>> reading this. If you respin this could you note that reason is
>> interrupts 0 and 1 are always routed back into the PRUSS.
> Yeah, this is always going to be somewhat confusing since the driver has
> to deal with all hosts from channel-mapping perspective, but only the 8
> interrupts at most that reach MPU for handling interrupts. TRM has
> Anyway, I have already mentioned the first 2 interrupt routing in the
> first paragraph above.
> Thinking more
>> on that, the same is true for interrupt 7 ("host5") on AM437x/66AK2G yet
>> we don't skip that in the naming.. now that we have the reserved IRQ
>> mechanism above, why not leave the one-to-one interrupt to name mapping,
>> but always have at least the first two marked as reserved for all the
>> current devices:
>> ti,irqs-reserved = /bits/ 8 <0 1>;
>> Then any "hostx" listed as reserved need not be present in the host
>> interrupts property array. To me that would solve the "managing
>> interrupts not targeting the Linux running core" problem and keep the
>> names consistent, e.g.:
> I had actually used the interrupt-names always starting from "host2"
> through "host9" (names from PRU perspective) previously, and I have
> changed this to start indexing from 0 in this series to address an
> internal review comment from Grygorii and to align with TRM. All the
> TRMs (except for AM572x) actually use the names/signals "host_intr0",
> "host_intr1".."host_intr7" etc for the interrupts going towards MPU.
> Maybe I should actually rename the interrupt-names to be host_intrX
> instead of hostX to avoid confusion and be exactly aligned with the TRM
> names. I will file a bug against AM57xx TRM to align the names with all
> other SoC TRMs.
> I am using "output interrupt lines" to imply names w.r.t PRU vs "host
> interrupt" to imply ARM GIC names.
> regards
> Suman

FWIW, the AM1808 TRM only uses PRU_EVTOUT0 to PRU_EVTOUT7 and does not
mention "host" in relation to these interrupts. The AM3xxx and AM4xxx
also use similar names (PRU_ICSS_EVTOUT0, PRU_ICSS1_EVTOUT0) although
they do mention that the source is "pr1_host[0] output/events exported
from PRU_ICSS1". (Also, the older processors have AINTC instead of GIC).

Maybe to help clarify here we could mention "event" in the docs:

+- interrupt-names : should use one of the following names for each valid
+ host event interrupt connected to ARM interrupt
+ controller,the name should match the corresponding
+ host event interrupt number,
+ "host0", "host1", "host2", "host3", "host4",
+ "host5", "host6" or "host7"


>>> +
>>> +Example:
>>> +--------
>>> +
>>> +1. /* AM33xx PRU-ICSS */
>>> + pruss: pruss@0 {

I don't suppose there is a generic name that could be used here
instead of pruss? It seems like there should be one for remote
processors that aren't DSPs or other specialized processors.

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-10 19:39    [W:0.058 / U:57.616 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site