Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: i3c: MIPI I3C Host Controller Interface
From: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-08-14 18:07:14
Also in:
linux-i3c
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:49 PM Nicolas Pitre [off-list ref] wrote:
From: Nicolas Pitre <redacted> The MIPI I3C HCI (Host Controller Interface) specification defines a common software driver interface to support compliant MIPI I3C host controller hardware implementations from multiple vendors. Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <redacted> --- .../devicetree/bindings/i3c/mipi-i3c-hci.txt | 15 +++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/mipi-i3c-hci.txt
Bindings should be in schema format now.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/mipi-i3c-hci.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/mipi-i3c-hci.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..8de7d7ac6a --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/mipi-i3c-hci.txt@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +MIPI I3C Host Controller Interface +---------------------------------- + +Required properties: +- compatible : "mipi-i3c-hci"
A register interface (or protocol) spec is never complete enough to capture all the details about a specific h/w implementation. One just has to go look at AHCI, EHCI, OHCI, XHCI, UFS, 8250, etc. bindings. Let's not start with pretending that here. Fine for this to be a fallback, but it must have a compatible for a specific implementation. Also, which version of the spec does this compatible correspond to? Or are there not HCI differences in the spec versions you mention in the cover letter?
+- reg : Should contain 1 register range (address and length)
+- interrupts : HCI interrupt
+
+Example:
+
+ mipi_i3c_hci@0xa0000000 {i3c@a0000000
+ compatible = "mipi-i3c-hci"; + reg = <0xa0000000 0x2000>; + interrupts = <89>; + }; -- 2.26.2