Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752508Ab3G1FA2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 28 Jul 2013 01:00:28 -0400
Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.220.47]:59166 "EHLO
	mail-pa0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750831Ab3G1FA0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 28 Jul 2013 01:00:26 -0400
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: How to create IRQ mappings in a GPIO driver that doesn't control its IRQ domain ?
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <1681089.qGWOhLKTTo@avalon>
References: <1624911.6TtmtVmU1T@avalon> <1408178.cxAUTUGJc5@avalon> <20130725131556.GD9858@sirena.org.uk> <1681089.qGWOhLKTTo@avalon>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 23:00:21 -0600
Message-Id: <20130728050021.4370E3E0A24@localhost>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2448
Lines: 48

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.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/