[PATCH 0/4] Add AST2700 INTC0/INTC1 support

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 05/02/2026 10:49, Ryan Chen wrote:
> 
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add AST2700 INTC0/INTC1 support
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 02:07:18PM +0800, Ryan Chen wrote:
>>> This series replaces the existing AST2700 interrupt controller binding
>>> and driver. The original implementation was focused on a narrow,
>>> PSP-centric view and could not fully describe the complexity of the
>>> AST2700 interrupt fabric:
>>>
>>> * It was focused primarily on the perspective of the Primary Service
>>>   Processor (PSP).
>>> * It could not handle interrupt route configuration.
>>> * It could not handle interrupt register protection.
>>>
>>> By contrast, the new bindings and drivers describe the interrupt
>>> controllers at the block-function level and provide a unified binding
>>> design that can be used from the perspective of any of the four
>>> integrated processors (the Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Service
>>> Processors, and the Boot MCU):
>>
>> Where and how did you address last feedback given to you here:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250814-auspicious-thundering-jaybird-b76f4f@ku
>> oka/
>>
>> "This binding is not improving. You are not responding to REAL problems
>> described to you. What's more, you send it in a way making our life difficult,
>> look:"
>>
>> So how did you make our life easier now?
>>
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Thanks for your feedback.
> 
> The series you commented on in Aug 2025 (v4 1/2) attempted to model
> The hardware by introducing parent compatibles (aspeed,ast2700-intc0 /
> aspeed,ast2700-intc1) with child "interrupt-controller@" nodes using
> aspeed,ast2700-intc-ic. In hindsight, that approach did not align well
> with the actual hardware structure and resulted in inconsistencies
> between the diagrams, the schema, and the register layout (including
> unit-address issues). It was also difficult to review in isolation.

Read my question again:

"So how did you make our life easier now?"

And then read the earlier comment - what I expected of you. Please
answer these after the "look:" part.

Answer these please. I am not going to review any of these because you
keep ignoring our process of handling patches and not really responding
to review comments.

Best regards,
Krzysztof