Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/31] Documentation: Add binding for kalray,kv3-1-core-intc
On 26/01/2023 17:10, Jules Maselbas wrote:
>> + reg:
>> + maxItems: 0
>
> ??? No way... What's this?
This (per CPU) interrupt controller is not memory mapped at all, it is
controlled and configured through system registers.
I do not have found existing .yaml bindings for such devices, only the
file snps,archs-intc.txt has something similar.
I do not know what is the best way to represent such devices in the
device-tree. Any suggestions are welcome.
You cannot have an array property with 0 items. How would it look like
in DTS? There are many, many bindings which are expressing it. Just drop
the reg.
>
>> + "kalray,intc-nr-irqs":
>
> Drop quotes.
>
>> + description: Number of irqs handled by the controller.
>
> Why this is variable per board? Why do you need it ?
This property is not even used in our device-tree, this will be removed
from the documentation and from the driver as well.
>> +
>> +required:
>> + - compatible
>> + - "#interrupt-cells"
>> + - interrupt-controller
>
> missing additionalProperties: false
>
> This binding looks poor, like you started from something odd. Please
> don't. Take the newest reviewed binding or better example-schema and use
> it to build yours. This would solve several trivial mistakes and style
> issues.
I am starting over from the example-schema.
>> +
>> +examples:
>> + - |
>> + intc: interrupt-controller {
>
> What's the IO address space?
As said above, this is not a memory mapped device, but is accessed
through system registers.
Sure, but then you cannot define a reg which was confusing...
Best regards,
Krzysztof