Re: [RFC PATCH v10 1/7] dt-bindings: PCI: Add definition of PCIe WAKE# irq and PCI irq

[Tony Lindgren]

* Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> [171101 21:07]:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 01:45:17PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > IMO, since you're trying to augment a standardized binding, you need to
> > be a lot clearer here. I expect you should mention the existing standard
> > (that devices may optionally include an 'interrupts' property that
> > represents the legacy PCI interrupt) and how you're augmenting it (that
> > additional interrupts can be supported optionally, but they require a
> > corresponding 'interrupt-names' property).
> 
> There's an additional complication that I'd guess the wakeup is 
> typically a GPIO line and hence a different parent. We have 2 options 
> there. The first is interrupts-extended which is generally implicitly 
> supported (i.e. we only document interrupts). The second is we already 
> have interrupt-map if we have legacy interrupts and can map to different 
> parents. For this to work, we'd have to use a number >4 for the wakeup 
> interrupts.

The wakeup interrupt can also be a separate always on interrupt
controller in addition to GPIOs. Anyways, the interrupts-extended
binding works well for these. And the interrupt-names we seem
to have standardized on are "irq" and "wakeup".

Regards,

Tony