>>> + PIC8259: interrupt-controller {
>>> + device_type = "i8259";
>>>
>>> device_type = "interrupt-controller".
>
> Is that really right? The MPIC binding, at least, has device_type =
> "open-pic" rather than "interrupt-controller".
I got confused. "open-pic" as device_type is nonsense, because
it doesn't define anything an OF can work with itself. However,
since some older interrupt controller bindings (pre-imap) define
a device_type, the interrupt mapping recommended practice had to
work around this, so it specified an empty "interrupt-controller"
property for all interrupt controller nodes.
I don't know what the specified device_type for 8259s is; it
seems to me you don't need it in a flat device tree at all.
>>> + MPIC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
>>> + device_type = "open-pic";
>>>
>>> device_type = "interrupt-controller".
>
> Not according to the binding in booting-without-of.txt
Yeah, mea culpa. Again, you can just leave it out I think.
Segher
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
