> > I got another idea. What about a boolean binding "smbus"? ... > > I much prefer this solution than the usage of the smbus_alert irq value > (in case of the i2c-stm32f7). In that case, I'd only set smbus boolean > to enable both SMBus Host-Notify & SMBus Alert. Correct. > In case of a device having a dedicated irq for SMBus Alert, smbus_alert > irq binding would still be needed. Yes, that was my idea. Let's use "smbus". > Just my 2 cents about another aspect regarding SMBus Alert, since alert > is coming from another pin and not the usual SCL / SCK, when SMBus Alert > has to be used, there is a very good chance to have a pinctrl entry which > is different from not using SMBus Alert. > Indeed, even if we need SMBus, but don't need SMBus Alert, the SMBus Alert > input pin might be used for something else. > But this of course doesn't prevent to use the smbus boolean binding. I am not sure if I fully get this point. Either we have a dedicated line (your case) or we need to use a GPIO as an interrupt line (my case). So, either this is configured correctly in DT and added as a "smbus_alert" irq. Or this irq is missing and then the driver will ignore SMBusAlert and the GPIO can be freely used/muxed. Or?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
