Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 18 May 2020 12:53:26 +0200
From:   Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@st.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, "wsa@kernel.org" <wsa@kernel.org>
CC:     "mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Pierre Yves MORDRET <pierre-yves.mordret@st.com>,
        "mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com" <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
        "linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com" 
        <linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Fabrice GASNIER <fabrice.gasnier@st.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: i2c-stm32: add SMBus Alert bindings
Message-ID: <20200518105326.GA3267@gnbcxd0016.gnb.st.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        "wsa@kernel.org" <wsa@kernel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Pierre Yves MORDRET <pierre-yves.mordret@st.com>,
        "mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com" <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
        "linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com" <linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Fabrice GASNIER <fabrice.gasnier@st.com>
References: <1588657871-14747-1-git-send-email-alain.volmat@st.com>
 <1588657871-14747-4-git-send-email-alain.volmat@st.com>
 <20200513021932.GA9172@bogus>
 <20200513054231.GA16558@gnbcxd0016.gnb.st.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200513054231.GA16558@gnbcxd0016.gnb.st.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Gentle Reminder, as I wrote in my previous responce, smbus_alert interrupt
refers to an host and not a client. And since we do not have a dedicated
irq for smbus_alert, I propose to add this st, binding to enable the
smbus_alert mechanism.

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 07:42:31AM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote:
> Hello Rob,
> 
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 02:19:32AM +0000, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 07:51:10AM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote:
> > > Add a new binding of the i2c-stm32f7 driver to enable the handling
> > > of the SMBUS-Alert
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@st.com>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml | 4 ++++
> > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml
> > > index b50a2f420b36..04c0882c3661 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml
> > > @@ -36,6 +36,10 @@ allOf:
> > >                  minItems: 3
> > >                  maxItems: 3
> > >  
> > > +        st,smbus-alert:
> > > +          description: Enable the SMBus Alert feature
> > > +          $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag
> > > +
> > 
> > We already have smbus_alert interrupt. Can't you just check for this in 
> > the slave nodes and enable if found?
> 
> My understanding reading the code (smbalert_probe within i2c-smbus.c, of_i2c_setup_smbus_alert called when
> registering an adapter within i2c-core-smbus.c) is that smbus_alert refers to an interrupt on the
> adapter side. That is an interrupt that would be triggered when the adapter is receiving an smbus_alert
> message.
> In our case (stm32f7), we do not have specific interrupt for that purpose. The interrupt triggered when
> an SMBUS Alert is received (by the adapter) is the same interrupt as for other reasons and we check
> within the irq handler within stm32f7 the reason before calling i2c_handle_smbus_alert if the status
> register indicated an SMBUS Alert.
> So my understanding is that we cannot rely on the mechanism of naming an interrupt smbus_alert.
> Did I misunderstood something ?
> 
> > 
> > >    - if:
> > >        properties:
> > >          compatible:
> > > -- 
> > > 2.17.1
> > >