Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] irqchip: RISC-V Local Interrupt Controller Driver

[Anup Patel]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:41 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 06:07:12PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > Considering above, it is better to have a distinct irqchip and
>> > irq_domain for all local interrupts (just like this patch).
>>
>> If that's the future usage
>
> It's not, at least there has been no proposal for that so far, and I
> don't really think it is how the architecture was intended.
>
>> and that's what my impression was, under which I
>> changed my mind, yes, then having a domain model is certainly of advantage
>> especially when those things end up being different per SoC.
>
> And even if we went down the way of using the other bits it would
> be architectureal in the RISC-V spec - these are not available for
> vendor specific uses.

I am quite sure RISC-V spec does not restrict the use of other
local interrupts. Different CPU implementations can have their
own local interrupts.

Regards,
Anup