Re: [RFC 2/5] i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Le Tue, 1 Aug 2017 19:27:03 +0200,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> > I'm surprised they didn't allow for slave clock stretching when
> > communicating with a legacy i2c device, it will prohibit use of a rather
> > large class of devices. :(  
> 
> Yes, but I3C is push/pull IIRC.

It is.

> 
> > As for interrupts you are always free to wire up an out-of-band
> > interrupt like before. :)  
> 
> Yes, my wording was a bit too strong. It is possible, sure. Yet, I
> understood that one of the features of I3C is to have in-band interrupt
> support. We will see if the demand for backward compatibility or "saving
> pins" is higher.
> 

Indeed, you can use in-band interrupts if your device is able to
generate them, but that doesn't prevent I3C device designers from using
an external pin to signal interrupts if they prefer.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux