Re: [RFC 0/2] PCI: Introduce MSI chip infrastructure

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Monday 25 March 2013, Thierry Reding wrote:
> I think you can just make this:
> 
>         mpic: interrupt-controller@d0020000 {
>                 ...
>         };
> 
>         ...
> 
>         soc {
>                 pcie-controller {
>                         marvell,msi = <&mpic>;
>                 };
>         };
> 
> And everything else should just work given the APIs I mentioned. But as
> you said it'd be good if somebody else could share their opinion about
> this.


I think the property referring to the msi controller should have a fixed
name, such as "msi-parent", to go along with "interrupt-parent".
Similarly, I would suggest using an empty "msi-controller" property
to mark the controller that is capable of serving MSIs. The Linux
implementation doesn't currently require the "interrupt-controller"
property, but I think it's good to stay close to the original interrupt
binding here for consistency.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/