[PATCH v3 7/7] devicetree: bindings: Document PM8921/8058 PMICs

[Lee Jones]

> > > +- interrupts:
> > > +	Usage: required
> > > +	Value type: <prop-encoded-array>
> > 
> > Either provide an example or a comment to see the description of
> > #interrupt-cells 
> 
> It is part of the example. We also state that the format is
> defined by the interrupt parent binding.

Okay, fair enough.

> > > +	Definition: specifies the interrupt that indicates a subdevice
> > > +		    has generated an interrupt (summary interrupt). The
> > > +		    format of the specifier is defined by the binding document
> > > +		    describing the node's interrupt parent.
> > > +
> > > +- #interrupt-cells:
> > > +	Usage: required
> > > +	Value type : <u32>
> > > +	Definition: must be 2. Specifies the number of cells needed to encode
> > > +		    an interrupt source. The 1st cell contains the interrupt
> > > +		    number. The 2nd cell is the trigger type and level flags
> > > +		    encoded as follows:
> > > +
> > > +			1 = low-to-high edge triggered
> > > +			2 = high-to-low edge triggered
> > > +			4 = active high level-sensitive
> > > +			8 = active low level-sensitive
> > 
> > Actually I'd prefer if you used the definitions in:
> >   dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h
> 
> These match the #defines in that file. I'd like to be explicit
> about the numbers to prevent people from thinking they have to
> use #defines and to match what other irq controllers have done
> (gic, atmel-aic, etc.)

I believe people _do_ have to use the #defines? Is there a good reason
for you not wanting to use them?

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog