On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 09:36 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:14:10PM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > 
> > Since v1:
> > 
> > Rob: I haven't added your Acked-by here as I've made the following changes 
> > and
> > wanted to get your input:
> > 
> > * Remove interrupt-controller as an optional property
> > * Defer to interrupt-controller bindings document for sub-node properties
> > 
> > I had a discussion with Joel about whether the interrupt-controller 
> > capability
> > should be optional and the conclusion was that it should always be 
> > configured
> > by the driver. This makes an optional interrupt-controller property feel
> > redundant (and possibly inaccurate if left out) so I've removed it.
> I don't follow. What do you mean byt "configured by the driver". If the 
> block supports interrupts, then it should be marked as an 
> interrupt-controller. It never should have been optional. The OS can 
> ignore the interrupt properties if it chooses. 

Right, clearly there was some confusion on my part. I will fix that up.
Thanks for clarifying.

Andrew

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to