[PATCH v12 2/4] dt-bindings: soc: microchip: document PolarFire SoC's gpio interrupt mux

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 12:58 PM Conor Dooley <conor at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Rob,
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 11:41:17AM -0500, Rob Herring (Arm) wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 11 Mar 2026 15:17:39 +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com>
> > >
> > > On PolarFire SoC there are more GPIO interrupts than there are interrupt
> > > lines available on the PLIC, and a runtime configurable mux is used to
> > > decide which interrupts are assigned direct connections to the PLIC &
> > > which are relegated to sharing a line.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina at bootlin.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com>
> > > ---
> > >  .../soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.yaml  | 77 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >  .../microchip,mpfs-mss-top-sysreg.yaml        |  4 +
> > >  2 files changed, 81 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.yaml
> > >
> >
> > My bot found errors running 'make dt_binding_check' on your patch:
>
> AAAAAAAAA, goddammit. I forgot there was a reason why I had not just
> sent off the new version of the series.

Providing reviews of bindings entitles you to free testing of your patches. :)

> > yamllint warnings/errors:
> >
> > dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.example.dts:18.33-24.11: Warning (interrupt_provider): /example-0/interrupt-controller at 54: '#interrupt-cells' found, but node is not an interrupt provider
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.example.dtb: Warning (interrupt_map): Failed prerequisite 'interrupt_provider'
>
> I wanted to ask about this Rob, I wasn't sure I fully understood it.
> I figured it was because...
>
>
> > /builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.example.dtb: interrupt-controller at 54 (microchip,mpfs-irqmux): 'interrupt-map' is a required property
> >       from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.yaml
>
> ...I had not added the interrupt-map yet...

Yes.

> > /builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.example.dtb: interrupt-controller at 54 (microchip,mpfs-irqmux): 'interrupt-map' is a dependency of 'interrupt-map-mask'
> >       from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/interrupt-controller.yaml
> > /builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/microchip,mpfs-irqmux.example.dtb: interrupt-controller at 54 (microchip,mpfs-irqmux): 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> >       'interrupt-controller' is a required property
> >       'interrupt-map' is a required property
> >       from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/interrupt-controller.yaml
>
> ...so this schema complained. But why is there a custom warning about
> "node is not an interrupt provider", when the conditional schema
> produces a warning of its own?

The first warning is from dtc. There is some overlap with schema checks.

Rob