> > This should fix a bug with one IRQ for all PCI devices and also handle the
> > PCI_CORE interrupt.
> No it doesn't. Assigning it in dts doesn't mean that we "handled" it.
> But I still like this patch because it's doing a cleanup of the messy code.
I am still not very competent in the IRQ handling. I thought that if we set
interrupts = <4>; and the new partent, your "case 4:" may work.
> >
> > + pci_intc: interrupt-controller@18060018 {
> > + compatible = "qca,ar7100-pci-intc";
> > + reg = <0x18060018 0x4>;
> > + interrupt-parent = <&cpuintc>;
> > + interrupts = <2>;
> > + interrupt-controller;
> > + #interrupt-cells = <1>;
> > + };
> > +
> For other chips this node is a subnode of reset-controller. But in
> this case here we can just put this above reset-controller@18060024.
> Nodes in dts are supposed to be ordered by register address.
No problem with that, I thought about a child node. But it doesn't
make any difference IMHO.
> > +
> > pcie0: pcie-controller@180c0000 {
> > compatible = "qca,ar7100-pci";
> > #address-cells = <3>;
> > @@ -105,14 +115,16 @@
> > reg-names = "cfg_base";
> > ranges = <0x2000000 0 0x10000000 0x10000000
> > 0 0x07000000 /* pci memory */
> > 0x1000000 0 0x00000000 0x0000000
> > 0 0x000001>; /* io space */
> > - interrupt-parent = <&cpuintc>;
> > - interrupts = <2>;
> > + interrupt-parent = <&pci_intc>;
> > + interrupts = <4>;
> Do we really need this? We don't even have a handler that actually do
> anything for it. I think the above two lines can simply be dropped.
See above. I thought the existing handler could work. I must be wrong.
> > diff --git
> > a/target/linux/ath79/patches-4.14/0020-MIPS-ath79-turn-pci-ar71xx-driver-into-a-pure-OF-dri.patch
> >
> > b/target/linux/ath79/patches-4.14/0020-MIPS-ath79-turn-pci-ar71xx-driver-into-a-pure-OF-dri.patch
> > index ea3514a..95ca6d1 100644
> > ---
> > a/target/linux/ath79/patches-4.14/0020-MIPS-ath79-turn-pci-ar71xx-driver-into-a-pure-OF-dri.patch
> > +++
> > b/target/linux/ath79/patches-4.14/0020-MIPS-ath79-turn-pci-ar71xx-driver-into-a-pure-OF-dri.patch
> It's not a good idea to mix the removal of IRQ part into this patch. I
> suggest using a separated patch to do the removing.
It is a minor issue if everything else looks good. The idea was to
keep number of patches smaller.
> I haven't read the code thoroghly but it seemed that irq-ath79-misc
> works in a similar way. Is it possible to use the misc intc driver for
> PCI?
They are similar. I used that code as an example, but the
irq-ath79-pci has your mask/unmask for pci with reading the registers.
It is possible to make one driver for both, but is it really needed?
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
