Re: [RFC PATCH v1] irqchip: add support for SMP irq router

[Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>]

Hey Sebastian, Mason,

* Please fix mailer to wrap text at a sane length.  I've re-wrapped and
trimmed.

On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 02:30:12PM +0200, Sebastian Frias wrote:
> On 07/04/2016 02:11 PM, Mason wrote:
...
> >>  .../sigma,smp87xx-irqrouter.txt                    |  69 +++
> > 
> > In the *actual* submission, we can't use a wildcard like smp87xx
> > we'll have to use an actual part number.
> 
> Are you sure?
> That would hinder genericity.
> Actually I wanted to call it "sigma,smp-irqrouter.txt" (or "sigma,smp,irqrouter.txt").

sigma,smp-irqrouter.txt should be fine.  The devicetree maintainers
should yelp if they want something different.

> To me there's no need to link the compatible string of a given HW
> module with that of the chip name the module it is embedded into.  For
> example, the generic USB3 driver is "generic-xhci".  While this module
> is not generic to be embedded in chips from different manufacturers,
> it is supposed to be generic within Sigma, and multiple Sigma chips
> (with potentially different denominations) can use it.
> 
> > 
> >>  drivers/irqchip/Makefile                           |   1 +
> >>  drivers/irqchip/irq-tango_v2.c                     | 594 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > Likewise, I don't like the "_v2" suffix, it's too generic.
> > Actual submission should use something more specific.
> 
> Well, the other driver is irq-tango.c that is generic as well.
> I prefer versioning, as it is unrelated with the actual chip name.

Is there a name, similar to 'tango', for this version of the IP?
Something that would spark recognition for someone looking for "the damn
driver for this XYZ irqchip I have".  If not, irq-tango_v2.c is fine.

thx,

Jason.