Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 25 Jan 2021 18:04:43 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To:     Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com>,
        Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>,
        Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
        David Lechner <david@lechnology.com>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Grzegorz Jaszczyk <grzegorz.jaszczyk@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: irqchip: Add #address-cells to PRUSS INTC
Message-ID: <20210126000443.GA1223706@robh.at.kernel.org>
References: <20210115205819.19426-1-s-anna@ti.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210115205819.19426-1-s-anna@ti.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 02:58:19PM -0600, Suman Anna wrote:
> The '#address-cells' property looks to be a required property for
> interrupt controller nodes as indicated by a warning message seen
> when building dtbs with W=2. Adding the property to the PRUSS INTC
> dts nodes though fails the dtbs_check. Add this property to the
> PRUSS INTC binding to make it compliant with both dtbs_check and
> building dtbs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
> ---
> Hi Rob,
> 
> This patch is also part of our effort to get rid of the warnings seen
> around interrupt providers on TI K3 dtbs [1]. I needed this in the PRUSS
> INTC bindings to not get a warning with dtbs_check while also ensuring
> no warnings while building dtbs with W=2.
> 
> I would have expected the '#address-cells' requirement to be inherited
> automatically. And looking through the schema files, I actually do not
> see the interrupt-controller.yaml included automatically anywhere. You
> had asked us to drop the inclusion in this binding in our first version
> with YAML [3]. Am I missing something, and how do we ensure that this
> is enforced automatically for everyone?

interrupt-controller.yaml is applied to any node named 
'interrupt-controller'. More generally, if 'compatible' is not present, 
then we look at $nodename for the default 'select'. In your case, you 
didn't name the node appropriately.
 
We can't check this in interrupt-controller.yaml because #address-cells 
is not always 0. GICv3 is one notable exception.

> 
> regards
> Suman
> 
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/20210115083003.27387-1-lokeshvutla@ti.com/

I've commented on this thread now in regards to #address-cells.

Rob

> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/cover/20210114194805.8231-1-s-anna@ti.com/
> [3] https://patchwork.kernel.org/comment/23484523/
> 
>  .../bindings/interrupt-controller/ti,pruss-intc.yaml        | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)