Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: document new interrupt-array property

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 07:35:48 +0100

> It would be nicer to keep the "interrupts" property and
> add a property "interrupt-parents" with the same number
> of entries, that encodes the same as "interrupt-parent"
> but per interrupt.  You keep more in line with the
> "normal" stuff and I suspect it's less code to parse as
> well.

There are pro and cons to this approach. I did think about it initially.
The main cons is that "interrupts" becomes harder to parse as you ahve
to walk interrupt-parents at the same time to get the #interrupt-cells
of each entry. Also, it adds more potential for stupid breakage (how
shluld the parser react if interrupt-parents has less entries than
interrupts ?)

The pro, which is quite important too, is that it's a common assuption
that you have interrupts when you have an "interrupts" property, period.
In fact, it would indeed fit a bit better in the current parser.

> Wrong place to document this?  It's true for all interrupt
> specifiers.

Might be worth giving a crazy example where the 2 interrupt specifiers
have different size.

Ben.