From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5DBC433B4 for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 09:49:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 326BC61002 for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 09:49:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232397AbhEEJui (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2021 05:50:38 -0400 Received: from mx07-00178001.pphosted.com ([185.132.182.106]:51879 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232265AbhEEJui (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2021 05:50:38 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046668.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 1459hJda011331; Wed, 5 May 2021 11:49:24 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=foss.st.com; h=date : from : to : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=selector1; bh=U1j+kkMEVDtIpXFolKJBxuRWb0u7O4P5oXrM2MRHZkY=; b=6P846THNTdNrs3vLTVDlCsfdrFCHEP1i6pdMBz1Rre5lvSFdfSMss/sTLosSLtf1LF4L yZ/Px3dmz19RCwhw4ucxDkFMR6kNA2qzdEYeX3jPE/tXWbccABFzXnALHjl6oQsdcqkS LF9jTLzk4MtYKjz+Sp6HnpONNmKgv4pV3QPP3H/6uHvdFjoHKz258/+MRsDsUJn8SV2V WkJUdVz2u5Ry/KQ2YcsezEpvTSsB1msBIXr/jwkO6Ei/HUipy9/R9FbiKjgJnZjpp/TK QlgrKacRR1P1Z1BybImQnBxSdC5LFTsUlmt7MTv++MAZIOnIRAfWXfAccjcl1NmlxoPf Uw== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38bea3u91e-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 05 May 2021 11:49:24 +0200 Received: from euls16034.sgp.st.com (euls16034.sgp.st.com [10.75.44.20]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 49317100034; Wed, 5 May 2021 11:49:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag2node3.st.com [10.75.127.6]) by euls16034.sgp.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 28B442199A9; Wed, 5 May 2021 11:49:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gnbcxd0016.gnb.st.com (10.75.127.51) by SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 5 May 2021 11:49:21 +0200 Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 11:49:16 +0200 From: Alain Volmat To: Wolfram Sang , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: i2c: stm32f7: add st,smbus-alert binding for SMBus Alert Message-ID: <20210505094916.GA27818@gnbcxd0016.gnb.st.com> Mail-Followup-To: Wolfram Sang , robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, pierre-yves.mordret@foss.st.com, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fabrice.gasnier@foss.st.com References: <1616998145-28278-1-git-send-email-alain.volmat@foss.st.com> <1616998145-28278-2-git-send-email-alain.volmat@foss.st.com> <20210504195348.GB1783@kunai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210504195348.GB1783@kunai> X-Disclaimer: ce message est personnel / this message is private X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.51] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) To SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.761 definitions=2021-05-05_03:2021-05-05,2021-05-05 signatures=0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Wolfram, On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 09:53:48PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > + st,smbus-alert: > > After reading the specs again, I think we can make this a generic > binding. SMBusAlert is optional. So, we can say it is not covered by the > "smbus" binding and needs a seperate one. Makes sense? Indeed, SMBus Spec [1] mentions about SMBALERT#: An optional signal that a slave device can use to notify the system master that it has information for the master Hence it does make sense to separate it from the smbus binding. I will post a v4 of this serie with the addition of a generic binding 'smbus-alert'. Alain [1] http://www.smbus.org/specs/SMBus_3_1_20180319.pdf