> The current open-pic binding defines that interrupt specifiers > have 2 cells-- an interrupt number and level/sense encoding. > > With chips like the P4080 this is no longer sufficient to > represent the various types of interrupt sources handled by > the interrupt controller. A linear list of interrupt numbers > doesn't handle all interrupt types-- there are at least 4 different > kinds of interrupts on the P4080. > > We have a proposal to extend the open-pic binding in > a backwards compatible way to encode additional information > in the level/sense field.
Why can you not have a particular "compatible" for your device, i.e. have a new binding for it? Changing the "base" binding is asking for trouble. You can of course base your binding on the openpic one. > The advantage of the above approach is backwards compatibility. > Existing interrupt specifiers (and device trees) are valid with > this proposal. Actually they're not, like BenH pointed out. Segher _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
