On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 10:05 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > I think you are going the wrong way around. > > > > First thing first, is to make the irq domain / mapping API generic > > without the OF bits. > > > > IE. move the IRQ domain generically, get rid of irq_map by putting > the > > domain ptr & hw numbers in the irq desc/data etc... > > > > Then you can move over the OF specific bits which are optional and > > orthogonal to a large extent. > > As discussed in my other reply, I disagree. There isn't an immediate > need for the mapping interface in common code. It would be useful, > sure, for some interrupt controllers, but for many of them > irq_alloc_descs() and an irq_base value is all the functionality that > is needed, and irq_host doesn't gain anything.
No but the concept of domain is a pre-requisite. Even if it's an opaque data structure. And I don't want to have it be some "of" specific thing. > The OF translation on the other hand is needed immediately by several > architectures and are very much non-optional in that regard. But it relies on having an underlying mapping. I don't see how you can do one without the other, even if your mapping in effect is just an offset. And it is -not- related to OF. Whether you obtain that your interrupt you are interested it is interrupt 5 of your PIC "foo" via the device-tree or any other way (an arch quirk for example), you need the mechanism to associate them together, whether it's a simple offset as you propose (I'm ok with that for simple things, I just didn't think it was the right approach for powerpc but it's perfectly valid as an option generically) or a more complex radix-tree style mapping. Thus sort out the mapping interfaces first. _Then_ layout the device-tree bits on top. The basic parsing for the DT is already there. It will return a parent node and a __be32* pointer. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
