> -----Original Message----- > From: Kumar Gala [mailto:ga...@kernel.crashing.org] > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 1:54 PM > To: Yoder Stuart-B08248 > Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > Subject: Re: pci node question > > > On Apr 20, 2012, at 1:37 PM, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote: > > > There was refactoring change a while back that moved > > the interrupt map down into the virtual pci bridge. > > > > example: > > 42 /* controller at 0x200000 */ > > 43 &pci0 { > > 44 compatible = "fsl,p2041-pcie", "fsl,qoriq-pcie-v2.2"; > > 45 device_type = "pci"; > > 46 #size-cells = <2>; > > 47 #address-cells = <3>; > > 48 bus-range = <0x0 0xff>; > > 49 clock-frequency = <33333333>; > > 50 interrupts = <16 2 1 15>; > > 51 pcie@0 { > > 52 reg = <0 0 0 0 0>; > > 53 #interrupt-cells = <1>; > > 54 #size-cells = <2>; > > 55 #address-cells = <3>; > > 56 device_type = "pci"; > > 57 interrupts = <16 2 1 15>; > > 58 interrupt-map-mask = <0xf800 0 0 7>; > > 59 interrupt-map = < > > 60 /* IDSEL 0x0 */ > > 61 0000 0 0 1 &mpic 40 1 0 0 > > 62 0000 0 0 2 &mpic 1 1 0 0 > > 63 0000 0 0 3 &mpic 2 1 0 0 > > 64 0000 0 0 4 &mpic 3 1 0 0 > > 65 >; > > 66 }; > > 67 }; > > > > Why was the interrupt-map moved here? > > Its been a while, but I think i moved it down because of which node is used > for interrupt handling in > linux. > > > Do we really need the error interrupt specified twice? > > I put it twice because it has multiple purposes, one has to do with > interrupts defined by the PCI spec > vs ones defined via FSL controller. > > > Why is there a zeroed out reg property: reg = <0 0 0 0 0> ?? > > scratching my head, what happens if you remove it?
Tried removing the zeroed reg, and get this error when bringing up an e1000 interface: [root@kvmtst1 root]# ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.20 e1000e 0000:01:00.0: eth0: Unable to allocate interrupt, Error: -22 SIOCSIFFLAGS: Invalid argument Stuart _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
