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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1642686255-25951-1-git-send-email-akhilrajeev@nvidia.com>
 <1642686255-25951-3-git-send-email-akhilrajeev@nvidia.com>
 <CAHp75VehSCxszDV3UQCEnPk7OCXRabRMJEStjpCamBG6X1iaCw@mail.gmail.com> <DM5PR12MB18501911339A0274CBE20BB4C05B9@DM5PR12MB1850.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR12MB18501911339A0274CBE20BB4C05B9@DM5PR12MB1850.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:00:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vcs3raid6rHk0AJOomgSKJ1T-cF_qbcq_Yksitz_sE=3A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] docs: firmware-guide: ACPI: Add named interrupt doc
To:     Akhil R <akhilrajeev@nvidia.com>
Cc:     =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= 
        <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
        Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-i2c <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 2:50 PM Akhil R <akhilrajeev@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
> > > Added details and example for named interrupts in the ACPI table.
> >
> > Added details and example for --> Add a detailed example of the
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > +            Interrupt (ResourceConsumer, Level, ActiveHigh, Exclusive) {
> > > +                0x20,
> >
> > I would think of splitting this to two separate entries in between of which the
> > GpioInt() resource is provided. It will explicitly show that you describe the case
> > only for Interrupt(). Something like
> >
> >   Interrupt (...) { 0x20 }
> >   GpioInt(...) { ... }
> >   Interrupt (...) { 0x24 }
> >
> > But it's up to you.
> Instead, would it be good to add a statement mentioning this explicitly. Something
> like -
>
>     The interrupt name 'default' will correspond to 0x20 in Interrupt()
>     resource and 'alert' to 0x24. Note that only the Interrupt() resource
>     is mapped and not GpioInt() or similar.
>
> I feel mixing these in the example would add a bit of confusion to the reader.

That's why I added "up to you" in my previous reply. I also thought
about the example being a bit confusing for a reader who is
non-familiar with the ACPI.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko