[RFC PATCH 1/1] of/irq: create interrupts-extended-2 property

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:40:41PM +0000, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>> On 12:17 Wed 15 Jan     , Mark Rutland wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 11:47:25AM +0000, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>> > > The new interrupts-extended property, which reuses the phandle+arguments
>> > > pattern used by GPIOs and other core bindings, still have some issue.
>> > >
>> > > If an SoC have already specifiy interrupt and a board want to add specific
>> > > interrupt such as GPIO (which can be optionnal) be need to re-define
>> > > interrupts-extended. So allow to have an optionnale interrupts-extended-2
>> > > property.
>> > >
>> >
>> > NAK.
>> >
>> > This is a hack that works around a dts organisation issue. This is _not_
>> > a binding or parsing issue.
>>
>> So the DT is stupid. Yes w have board and SoC information
>> so we do not want to duplicate them. Having a way to descript SoC vs board
>> specific information need to be provided.
>
> I agree that the current situation isn't fantastic. That doesn't make
> the DT stupid. There are other solutions to this problem.
>
>>
>> >
>> > Properties can be overridden - just describe all of the interrupts in
>> > the final dts file.
>> this is wrong, which mean you duplicate informaation and duplicate bug and
>> fixes
>
> It's certainly not nice, but it doesn't make it wrong.
>
> The same problem can be found with any other list property that varies
> per-board. Hacking the parsing of each property is not a solution.
>
> Today the only way to implement what you want is to have the list in the
> final file.
>
> One way of working with that would be to have the common interrupts
> described in a shared macro in the soc file:
>
> #define SOC_COMMON_INTERRUPTS <&intc1 5 1>, <&intc2 1 0>

Yuck. Please, let's not encourage this pattern.

> Then the soc file can have:
>
>         interrupts = SOC_COMMON_INTERRUPTS;
>
> And the board can have:
>
>         interrupts = SOC_COMMON_INTERRUPTS, <&intc1 6 1>;

Unless this is solved in dtc include mechanism, just duplicate the
interrupts in each board file. I'd rather have the duplication than
continued churn of refactoring dtsi files.

Rob