On Wednesday 15 of May 2013 15:01:23 Doug Anderson wrote: > Tomasz, > > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This will be hard, since the phandle in interrupt-parent is > > represented by an IRQ domain in kernel code. One-interrupt IRQ > > domains seem a bit awkward to me. > > > > Since we are already going to modify the binding, let's think a bit > > more about this problem and try to figure out a solution that doesn't > > add any disadvantages (at least any significant) to avoid such > > situation in future again. > > I'm definitely not super familiar with the implementation at that > level of detail, so don't take my proposed syntax as something I've > thought all the way through. ...but hopefully you understand what I'm > getting at in terms of eliminating duplication?
Yes. I don't like the current way too much either, duplication being one of the reasons. Best regards, Tomasz _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
