i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2025-08-22 13:56:27 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:48 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2024-02-28 15:04:07 +05:30
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-04-05 17:41:49 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2023-10-13 12:06:24 +08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-08-16 15:08:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-27 12:31:07 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-27 12:31:07 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2020-02-27 12:31:07 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-27 12:31:07 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-11 12:30:07 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2023-01-11 12:30:07 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:30 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-02-27 12:31:06 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-07-01 14:07:37 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-07-01 14:07:37 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:48 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:48 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:31 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:48 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:31 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:48 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:48 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-13 21:35:22 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-01-28 10:10:48 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2021-09-22 17:56:00 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:06 -04:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:06 -04:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2023-04-05 17:41:49 +08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-04-05 17:41:49 +08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2023-04-05 17:41:49 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-10-13 12:06:24 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:32 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-23 10:15:05 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-04-21 16:48:37 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA work in the core
Three master drivers (dw-i3c-master, i3c-master-cdns, svc-i3c-master)
each carry an essentially identical Hot-Join handler: a struct
work_struct embedded in their private state, a work function that just
calls i3c_master_do_daa() on the embedded i3c_master_controller, plus
matching INIT_WORK()/cancel_work_sync() boilerplate in probe/remove (and
shutdown for dw-i3c). The IBI/ISR paths then queue that work onto
master->wq, which already lives in the core.
Move this pattern into the I3C core:
- Add struct work_struct hj_work to struct i3c_master_controller and
initialise it in i3c_master_register() with a core-provided handler
i3c_master_hj_work_fn() that performs i3c_master_do_daa().
- Cancel the work in i3c_master_unregister() so all controllers get
correct teardown ordering against the workqueue for free.
- Export i3c_master_queue_hotjoin() as the single entry point drivers
call from their Hot-Join IBI handler.
Convert the three existing users to the new API: drop their private
hj_work fields, work functions, INIT_WORK() and cancel_work_sync()
calls, and replace the queue_work(master->wq, &drv->hj_work) call sites
with i3c_master_queue_hotjoin(&drv->base). The dw-i3c shutdown path
still needs to flush pending Hot-Join work before tearing down the
hardware, so it is updated to cancel master->base.hj_work directly.
No functional change intended: the work is still queued on the same
master->wq, runs the same i3c_master_do_daa(), and is cancelled at
controller teardown. Future Hot-Join improvements now only need to
be made in one place.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-4-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Ensure Hot-Join operations are stopped on shutdown
System shutdown invokes each device's bus shutdown callback to quiesce
hardware, but the I3C bus type does not currently implement one. As a
result, on shutdown the controller's Hot-Join work and any in-flight
i3c_master_do_daa() can keep running (or be newly triggered) while the
rest of the system is being torn down.
A similar window exists at i3c_master_unregister() time: cancel_work_sync()
on hj_work prevents queued work from completing, but does not stop a
fresh Hot-Join IBI from re-queueing the worker, nor a concurrent sysfs
writer from toggling Hot-Join via i3c_set_hotjoin().
Introduce a single "shutting down" gate in the I3C core, set under the
bus maintenance lock so it is observed by any in-progress DAA path
before pending work is cancelled. Install an i3c_bus_type shutdown
callback that engages this gate for master devices during system
shutdown, and use the same gate in i3c_master_unregister() so both
paths get identical guarantees.
Once the gate is engaged, the Hot-Join worker, i3c_master_do_daa_ext()
and i3c_set_hotjoin() all bail out cleanly, so Hot-Join IBIs that race
with shutdown become no-ops, direct DAA callers see -ENODEV, and sysfs
writers can no longer re-enable Hot-Join through ops->enable_hotjoin()
while the controller is going away.
No functional change for the steady-state runtime path; the new checks
only take effect once the controller has been marked as shutting down.
Note, this patch depends on patch "i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA
work in the core".
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-5-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:08 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA work in the core
Three master drivers (dw-i3c-master, i3c-master-cdns, svc-i3c-master)
each carry an essentially identical Hot-Join handler: a struct
work_struct embedded in their private state, a work function that just
calls i3c_master_do_daa() on the embedded i3c_master_controller, plus
matching INIT_WORK()/cancel_work_sync() boilerplate in probe/remove (and
shutdown for dw-i3c). The IBI/ISR paths then queue that work onto
master->wq, which already lives in the core.
Move this pattern into the I3C core:
- Add struct work_struct hj_work to struct i3c_master_controller and
initialise it in i3c_master_register() with a core-provided handler
i3c_master_hj_work_fn() that performs i3c_master_do_daa().
- Cancel the work in i3c_master_unregister() so all controllers get
correct teardown ordering against the workqueue for free.
- Export i3c_master_queue_hotjoin() as the single entry point drivers
call from their Hot-Join IBI handler.
Convert the three existing users to the new API: drop their private
hj_work fields, work functions, INIT_WORK() and cancel_work_sync()
calls, and replace the queue_work(master->wq, &drv->hj_work) call sites
with i3c_master_queue_hotjoin(&drv->base). The dw-i3c shutdown path
still needs to flush pending Hot-Join work before tearing down the
hardware, so it is updated to cancel master->base.hj_work directly.
No functional change intended: the work is still queued on the same
master->wq, runs the same i3c_master_do_daa(), and is cancelled at
controller teardown. Future Hot-Join improvements now only need to
be made in one place.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-4-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-08 08:43:06 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Ensure Hot-Join operations are stopped on shutdown
System shutdown invokes each device's bus shutdown callback to quiesce
hardware, but the I3C bus type does not currently implement one. As a
result, on shutdown the controller's Hot-Join work and any in-flight
i3c_master_do_daa() can keep running (or be newly triggered) while the
rest of the system is being torn down.
A similar window exists at i3c_master_unregister() time: cancel_work_sync()
on hj_work prevents queued work from completing, but does not stop a
fresh Hot-Join IBI from re-queueing the worker, nor a concurrent sysfs
writer from toggling Hot-Join via i3c_set_hotjoin().
Introduce a single "shutting down" gate in the I3C core, set under the
bus maintenance lock so it is observed by any in-progress DAA path
before pending work is cancelled. Install an i3c_bus_type shutdown
callback that engages this gate for master devices during system
shutdown, and use the same gate in i3c_master_unregister() so both
paths get identical guarantees.
Once the gate is engaged, the Hot-Join worker, i3c_master_do_daa_ext()
and i3c_set_hotjoin() all bail out cleanly, so Hot-Join IBIs that race
with shutdown become no-ops, direct DAA callers see -ENODEV, and sysfs
writers can no longer re-enable Hot-Join through ops->enable_hotjoin()
while the controller is going away.
No functional change for the steady-state runtime path; the new checks
only take effect once the controller has been marked as shutting down.
Note, this patch depends on patch "i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA
work in the core".
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-5-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:08 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:26:44 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2026-06-08 08:43:06 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA work in the core
Three master drivers (dw-i3c-master, i3c-master-cdns, svc-i3c-master)
each carry an essentially identical Hot-Join handler: a struct
work_struct embedded in their private state, a work function that just
calls i3c_master_do_daa() on the embedded i3c_master_controller, plus
matching INIT_WORK()/cancel_work_sync() boilerplate in probe/remove (and
shutdown for dw-i3c). The IBI/ISR paths then queue that work onto
master->wq, which already lives in the core.
Move this pattern into the I3C core:
- Add struct work_struct hj_work to struct i3c_master_controller and
initialise it in i3c_master_register() with a core-provided handler
i3c_master_hj_work_fn() that performs i3c_master_do_daa().
- Cancel the work in i3c_master_unregister() so all controllers get
correct teardown ordering against the workqueue for free.
- Export i3c_master_queue_hotjoin() as the single entry point drivers
call from their Hot-Join IBI handler.
Convert the three existing users to the new API: drop their private
hj_work fields, work functions, INIT_WORK() and cancel_work_sync()
calls, and replace the queue_work(master->wq, &drv->hj_work) call sites
with i3c_master_queue_hotjoin(&drv->base). The dw-i3c shutdown path
still needs to flush pending Hot-Join work before tearing down the
hardware, so it is updated to cancel master->base.hj_work directly.
No functional change intended: the work is still queued on the same
master->wq, runs the same i3c_master_do_daa(), and is cancelled at
controller teardown. Future Hot-Join improvements now only need to
be made in one place.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-4-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-16 14:37:50 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-16 14:37:52 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-16 14:37:52 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-16 14:37:51 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-16 14:37:50 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-16 14:37:51 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-16 14:37:50 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-19 21:58:03 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-12-01 17:25:27 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2026-02-19 21:58:03 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:28 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:28 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Ensure Hot-Join operations are stopped on shutdown
System shutdown invokes each device's bus shutdown callback to quiesce
hardware, but the I3C bus type does not currently implement one. As a
result, on shutdown the controller's Hot-Join work and any in-flight
i3c_master_do_daa() can keep running (or be newly triggered) while the
rest of the system is being torn down.
A similar window exists at i3c_master_unregister() time: cancel_work_sync()
on hj_work prevents queued work from completing, but does not stop a
fresh Hot-Join IBI from re-queueing the worker, nor a concurrent sysfs
writer from toggling Hot-Join via i3c_set_hotjoin().
Introduce a single "shutting down" gate in the I3C core, set under the
bus maintenance lock so it is observed by any in-progress DAA path
before pending work is cancelled. Install an i3c_bus_type shutdown
callback that engages this gate for master devices during system
shutdown, and use the same gate in i3c_master_unregister() so both
paths get identical guarantees.
Once the gate is engaged, the Hot-Join worker, i3c_master_do_daa_ext()
and i3c_set_hotjoin() all bail out cleanly, so Hot-Join IBIs that race
with shutdown become no-ops, direct DAA callers see -ENODEV, and sysfs
writers can no longer re-enable Hot-Join through ops->enable_hotjoin()
while the controller is going away.
No functional change for the steady-state runtime path; the new checks
only take effect once the controller has been marked as shutting down.
Note, this patch depends on patch "i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA
work in the core".
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-5-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:08 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Defer new-device registration out of DAA caller context
Master drivers may invoke i3c_master_do_daa_ext() during resume to
re-run Dynamic Address Assignment. As well as assigning addresses to
any newly arrived devices, this restores the dynamic address of devices
that lost it across system suspend, so it has to run as part of the
controller's resume path.
A side effect of i3c_master_do_daa_ext() today is that it also
registers any newly discovered I3C devices with the driver model
inline, via i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs(). Doing that from the
resume path is problematic: a hot-join-capable device may join the bus
during this same DAA, and registering it immediately would push driver
model work (probing, sysfs, etc.) into the controller's resume context,
where the rest of the system is not yet fully resumed and the
controller driver is still partway through its own resume sequence.
Decouple discovery from registration: add a reg_work work item to
struct i3c_master_controller and have i3c_master_do_daa_ext() queue it
on master->wq (the freezable workqueue) instead of calling
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() directly. The worker performs the
registration only when the controller is not shutting_down, and is
cancelled alongside hj_work in i3c_master_shutdown(). Because wq is
freezable, any newly observed devices end up being registered after
the system has finished resuming.
i3c_master_register() also routes its initial post-bus-init registration
through reg_work, using flush_work() to keep probe-time behavior
synchronous. This keeps a single registration code path and ensures the
worker is the only writer of desc->dev.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-7-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:10 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Ensure Hot-Join operations are stopped on shutdown
System shutdown invokes each device's bus shutdown callback to quiesce
hardware, but the I3C bus type does not currently implement one. As a
result, on shutdown the controller's Hot-Join work and any in-flight
i3c_master_do_daa() can keep running (or be newly triggered) while the
rest of the system is being torn down.
A similar window exists at i3c_master_unregister() time: cancel_work_sync()
on hj_work prevents queued work from completing, but does not stop a
fresh Hot-Join IBI from re-queueing the worker, nor a concurrent sysfs
writer from toggling Hot-Join via i3c_set_hotjoin().
Introduce a single "shutting down" gate in the I3C core, set under the
bus maintenance lock so it is observed by any in-progress DAA path
before pending work is cancelled. Install an i3c_bus_type shutdown
callback that engages this gate for master devices during system
shutdown, and use the same gate in i3c_master_unregister() so both
paths get identical guarantees.
Once the gate is engaged, the Hot-Join worker, i3c_master_do_daa_ext()
and i3c_set_hotjoin() all bail out cleanly, so Hot-Join IBIs that race
with shutdown become no-ops, direct DAA callers see -ENODEV, and sysfs
writers can no longer re-enable Hot-Join through ops->enable_hotjoin()
while the controller is going away.
No functional change for the steady-state runtime path; the new checks
only take effect once the controller has been marked as shutting down.
Note, this patch depends on patch "i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA
work in the core".
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-5-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:08 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-12-04 11:56:30 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-07-24 11:41:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:32 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2025-07-24 11:41:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-07-24 11:41:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-21 16:37:42 -08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:38 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:32 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-23 17:23:10 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-21 16:37:42 -08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:29 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:32 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:30 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-08 08:43:11 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-08 08:43:11 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:32 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:32 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:32 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-05-31 12:35:32 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-22 21:54:59 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:38 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2020-04-15 16:30:01 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:38 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2019-08-11 13:33:06 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-11-14 16:55:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-11-14 16:55:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2023-11-17 13:09:24 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:41 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:40 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2023-11-14 16:55:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:38 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:38 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-08 00:17:38 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-01 12:26:08 -04:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-08-22 05:19:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:08 -04:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-09-26 18:51:44 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-01-05 16:29:52 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:08 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Fix recursive locking during device registration
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() registers newly discovered devices
while holding i3c_bus_normaluse_lock(), a down_read(). device_register()
can immediately probe the device, and probe callbacks typically invoke
I3C helpers that take i3c_bus_normaluse_lock() again, leading to a
recursive acquisition of the same rwsem. rwsems do not support recursive
read locking and can deadlock when a writer is waiting. See the
"Recursive read locks" section of Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst.
For example, with Intel LPSS I3C, LOCKDEP generates a WARNING like:
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/unbind
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/bind
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
kworker/5:1/94 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_device_match_id+0x45/0x370
but task is already holding lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_master_reg_work_fn+0x21/0x5f0
Fix this by separating device creation from device registration.
Populate desc->dev under the maintenance lock, collect the devices that
still need registration into a local list, then release the lock before
calling device_register(). Finally retake the lock and clean up any
devices that failed to register.
Use the maintenance lock rather than the normal-use lock while adding
device objects. A write-side maintenance lock prevents readers from
observing a partially initialized desc->dev during initial device
population, or desc->dev disappearing if registration fails.
The local list requires a list node, so add a list node member to struct
i3c_device.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0a ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260807145638.168865-2-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-08-07 17:56:25 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Fix recursive locking during device registration
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() registers newly discovered devices
while holding i3c_bus_normaluse_lock(), a down_read(). device_register()
can immediately probe the device, and probe callbacks typically invoke
I3C helpers that take i3c_bus_normaluse_lock() again, leading to a
recursive acquisition of the same rwsem. rwsems do not support recursive
read locking and can deadlock when a writer is waiting. See the
"Recursive read locks" section of Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst.
For example, with Intel LPSS I3C, LOCKDEP generates a WARNING like:
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/unbind
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/bind
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
kworker/5:1/94 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_device_match_id+0x45/0x370
but task is already holding lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_master_reg_work_fn+0x21/0x5f0
Fix this by separating device creation from device registration.
Populate desc->dev under the maintenance lock, collect the devices that
still need registration into a local list, then release the lock before
calling device_register(). Finally retake the lock and clean up any
devices that failed to register.
Use the maintenance lock rather than the normal-use lock while adding
device objects. A write-side maintenance lock prevents readers from
observing a partially initialized desc->dev during initial device
population, or desc->dev disappearing if registration fails.
The local list requires a list node, so add a list node member to struct
i3c_device.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0a ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260807145638.168865-2-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-08-07 17:56:25 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Fix recursive locking during device registration
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() registers newly discovered devices
while holding i3c_bus_normaluse_lock(), a down_read(). device_register()
can immediately probe the device, and probe callbacks typically invoke
I3C helpers that take i3c_bus_normaluse_lock() again, leading to a
recursive acquisition of the same rwsem. rwsems do not support recursive
read locking and can deadlock when a writer is waiting. See the
"Recursive read locks" section of Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst.
For example, with Intel LPSS I3C, LOCKDEP generates a WARNING like:
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/unbind
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/bind
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
kworker/5:1/94 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_device_match_id+0x45/0x370
but task is already holding lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_master_reg_work_fn+0x21/0x5f0
Fix this by separating device creation from device registration.
Populate desc->dev under the maintenance lock, collect the devices that
still need registration into a local list, then release the lock before
calling device_register(). Finally retake the lock and clean up any
devices that failed to register.
Use the maintenance lock rather than the normal-use lock while adding
device objects. A write-side maintenance lock prevents readers from
observing a partially initialized desc->dev during initial device
population, or desc->dev disappearing if registration fails.
The local list requires a list node, so add a list node member to struct
i3c_device.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0a ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260807145638.168865-2-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-08-07 17:56:25 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-21 16:37:42 -08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:32 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Fix recursive locking during device registration
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() registers newly discovered devices
while holding i3c_bus_normaluse_lock(), a down_read(). device_register()
can immediately probe the device, and probe callbacks typically invoke
I3C helpers that take i3c_bus_normaluse_lock() again, leading to a
recursive acquisition of the same rwsem. rwsems do not support recursive
read locking and can deadlock when a writer is waiting. See the
"Recursive read locks" section of Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst.
For example, with Intel LPSS I3C, LOCKDEP generates a WARNING like:
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/unbind
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/bind
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
kworker/5:1/94 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_device_match_id+0x45/0x370
but task is already holding lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_master_reg_work_fn+0x21/0x5f0
Fix this by separating device creation from device registration.
Populate desc->dev under the maintenance lock, collect the devices that
still need registration into a local list, then release the lock before
calling device_register(). Finally retake the lock and clean up any
devices that failed to register.
Use the maintenance lock rather than the normal-use lock while adding
device objects. A write-side maintenance lock prevents readers from
observing a partially initialized desc->dev during initial device
population, or desc->dev disappearing if registration fails.
The local list requires a list node, so add a list node member to struct
i3c_device.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0a ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260807145638.168865-2-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-08-07 17:56:25 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Fix recursive locking during device registration
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() registers newly discovered devices
while holding i3c_bus_normaluse_lock(), a down_read(). device_register()
can immediately probe the device, and probe callbacks typically invoke
I3C helpers that take i3c_bus_normaluse_lock() again, leading to a
recursive acquisition of the same rwsem. rwsems do not support recursive
read locking and can deadlock when a writer is waiting. See the
"Recursive read locks" section of Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst.
For example, with Intel LPSS I3C, LOCKDEP generates a WARNING like:
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/unbind
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/bind
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
kworker/5:1/94 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_device_match_id+0x45/0x370
but task is already holding lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_master_reg_work_fn+0x21/0x5f0
Fix this by separating device creation from device registration.
Populate desc->dev under the maintenance lock, collect the devices that
still need registration into a local list, then release the lock before
calling device_register(). Finally retake the lock and clean up any
devices that failed to register.
Use the maintenance lock rather than the normal-use lock while adding
device objects. A write-side maintenance lock prevents readers from
observing a partially initialized desc->dev during initial device
population, or desc->dev disappearing if registration fails.
The local list requires a list node, so add a list node member to struct
i3c_device.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0a ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260807145638.168865-2-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-08-07 17:56:25 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Defer new-device registration out of DAA caller context
Master drivers may invoke i3c_master_do_daa_ext() during resume to
re-run Dynamic Address Assignment. As well as assigning addresses to
any newly arrived devices, this restores the dynamic address of devices
that lost it across system suspend, so it has to run as part of the
controller's resume path.
A side effect of i3c_master_do_daa_ext() today is that it also
registers any newly discovered I3C devices with the driver model
inline, via i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs(). Doing that from the
resume path is problematic: a hot-join-capable device may join the bus
during this same DAA, and registering it immediately would push driver
model work (probing, sysfs, etc.) into the controller's resume context,
where the rest of the system is not yet fully resumed and the
controller driver is still partway through its own resume sequence.
Decouple discovery from registration: add a reg_work work item to
struct i3c_master_controller and have i3c_master_do_daa_ext() queue it
on master->wq (the freezable workqueue) instead of calling
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() directly. The worker performs the
registration only when the controller is not shutting_down, and is
cancelled alongside hj_work in i3c_master_shutdown(). Because wq is
freezable, any newly observed devices end up being registered after
the system has finished resuming.
i3c_master_register() also routes its initial post-bus-init registration
through reg_work, using flush_work() to keep probe-time behavior
synchronous. This keeps a single registration code path and ensures the
worker is the only writer of desc->dev.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-7-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:10 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Fix recursive locking during device registration
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() registers newly discovered devices
while holding i3c_bus_normaluse_lock(), a down_read(). device_register()
can immediately probe the device, and probe callbacks typically invoke
I3C helpers that take i3c_bus_normaluse_lock() again, leading to a
recursive acquisition of the same rwsem. rwsems do not support recursive
read locking and can deadlock when a writer is waiting. See the
"Recursive read locks" section of Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst.
For example, with Intel LPSS I3C, LOCKDEP generates a WARNING like:
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/unbind
# echo intel-lpss-i3c.0 > /sys/bus/platform/drivers/mipi-i3c-hci/bind
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
kworker/5:1/94 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_device_match_id+0x45/0x370
but task is already holding lock:
ffff88811c810d78 (&i3cbus->lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: i3c_master_reg_work_fn+0x21/0x5f0
Fix this by separating device creation from device registration.
Populate desc->dev under the maintenance lock, collect the devices that
still need registration into a local list, then release the lock before
calling device_register(). Finally retake the lock and clean up any
devices that failed to register.
Use the maintenance lock rather than the normal-use lock while adding
device objects. A write-side maintenance lock prevents readers from
observing a partially initialized desc->dev during initial device
population, or desc->dev disappearing if registration fails.
The local list requires a list node, so add a list node member to struct
i3c_device.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0a ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260807145638.168865-2-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-08-07 17:56:25 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Defer new-device registration out of DAA caller context
Master drivers may invoke i3c_master_do_daa_ext() during resume to
re-run Dynamic Address Assignment. As well as assigning addresses to
any newly arrived devices, this restores the dynamic address of devices
that lost it across system suspend, so it has to run as part of the
controller's resume path.
A side effect of i3c_master_do_daa_ext() today is that it also
registers any newly discovered I3C devices with the driver model
inline, via i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs(). Doing that from the
resume path is problematic: a hot-join-capable device may join the bus
during this same DAA, and registering it immediately would push driver
model work (probing, sysfs, etc.) into the controller's resume context,
where the rest of the system is not yet fully resumed and the
controller driver is still partway through its own resume sequence.
Decouple discovery from registration: add a reg_work work item to
struct i3c_master_controller and have i3c_master_do_daa_ext() queue it
on master->wq (the freezable workqueue) instead of calling
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() directly. The worker performs the
registration only when the controller is not shutting_down, and is
cancelled alongside hj_work in i3c_master_shutdown(). Because wq is
freezable, any newly observed devices end up being registered after
the system has finished resuming.
i3c_master_register() also routes its initial post-bus-init registration
through reg_work, using flush_work() to keep probe-time behavior
synchronous. This keeps a single registration code path and ensures the
worker is the only writer of desc->dev.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-7-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:10 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:34 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-08-22 13:56:27 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-21 20:03:00 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2025-08-22 13:56:27 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:28 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:28 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-22 21:54:59 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-09-10 13:16:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:29 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-09-10 13:16:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2025-01-08 17:55:33 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2024-09-10 13:16:25 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-23 17:11:31 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:08 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:08 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:07 -04:00
|
|
|
|
2020-08-25 08:31:49 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-05-21 11:32:22 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-05-21 11:32:22 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-09-05 13:06:52 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:27 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 11:01:05 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 11:01:03 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-23 10:14:42 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-01-25 07:40:32 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2020-05-21 11:32:22 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-01 12:22:32 -04:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2024-10-01 12:22:32 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-10-21 11:45:08 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:08 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 11:01:05 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 11:01:03 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 11:01:03 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 11:01:06 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Reconcile dynamic addresses after DAA
After Dynamic Address Assignment (DAA), there may be cases where
devices have been assigned dynamic addresses on the bus, but are not
successfully registered in the device model. This can happen, for
example, if errors occur during device addition, leaving the bus state
and software state inconsistent.
Introduce a reconciliation step to resolve such inconsistencies.
Scan all address slots marked as I3C devices by the bus, and compare
them against the set of devices currently registered. For any dynamic
address that is marked occupied but has no corresponding i3c_dev_desc,
probe for device presence using a GETSTATUS CCC.
Retry the probe (with exponential backoff delay) to handle transient NACK
conditions. If a device responds, register it via
i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked(). Otherwise, free the address
slot so it may be reused in future DAA operations.
Note, i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked() may fail (again), in which case the
dynamic address remains marked as occupied. A future DAA will try again.
This also handles a corner case where a device is assigned a dynamic
address but not successfully added, and subsequently loses that address
(e.g. due to power management). If DAA is run again, the device may
receive a new dynamic address while the old one remains marked as
occupied. Repeated occurrences of this scenario could eventually
exhaust the dynamic address space. The reconciliation step ensures that
stale addresses are detected and freed, preventing address leakage.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260612080107.11606-8-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-12 11:01:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 11:01:06 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-04-16 09:36:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-17 11:40:15 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-04-16 09:36:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-03-21 21:30:06 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-12-24 13:45:52 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-04-16 09:36:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2019-04-16 09:36:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-03-21 21:30:06 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-04-16 09:36:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-22 12:11:07 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-09-21 03:51:04 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2025-09-05 13:03:20 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-12-12 17:17:53 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-03-08 13:42:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2022-03-08 13:42:26 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-23 10:57:47 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-07-23 10:57:47 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:33 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-03-26 18:00:46 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-08-07 17:56:33 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2023-10-16 00:23:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-11 17:15:34 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-11 17:15:34 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-03-11 17:15:34 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-12-03 15:45:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2019-04-16 09:36:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-07-24 11:41:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-09-21 08:56:53 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2025-10-16 10:38:13 -04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-12 14:07:22 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-07-28 06:59:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:32 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-07-24 11:41:40 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-19 20:36:31 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-08 08:43:05 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA work in the core
Three master drivers (dw-i3c-master, i3c-master-cdns, svc-i3c-master)
each carry an essentially identical Hot-Join handler: a struct
work_struct embedded in their private state, a work function that just
calls i3c_master_do_daa() on the embedded i3c_master_controller, plus
matching INIT_WORK()/cancel_work_sync() boilerplate in probe/remove (and
shutdown for dw-i3c). The IBI/ISR paths then queue that work onto
master->wq, which already lives in the core.
Move this pattern into the I3C core:
- Add struct work_struct hj_work to struct i3c_master_controller and
initialise it in i3c_master_register() with a core-provided handler
i3c_master_hj_work_fn() that performs i3c_master_do_daa().
- Cancel the work in i3c_master_unregister() so all controllers get
correct teardown ordering against the workqueue for free.
- Export i3c_master_queue_hotjoin() as the single entry point drivers
call from their Hot-Join IBI handler.
Convert the three existing users to the new API: drop their private
hj_work fields, work functions, INIT_WORK() and cancel_work_sync()
calls, and replace the queue_work(master->wq, &drv->hj_work) call sites
with i3c_master_queue_hotjoin(&drv->base). The dw-i3c shutdown path
still needs to flush pending Hot-Join work before tearing down the
hardware, so it is updated to cancel master->base.hj_work directly.
No functional change intended: the work is still queued on the same
master->wq, runs the same i3c_master_do_daa(), and is cancelled at
controller teardown. Future Hot-Join improvements now only need to
be made in one place.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-4-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Defer new-device registration out of DAA caller context
Master drivers may invoke i3c_master_do_daa_ext() during resume to
re-run Dynamic Address Assignment. As well as assigning addresses to
any newly arrived devices, this restores the dynamic address of devices
that lost it across system suspend, so it has to run as part of the
controller's resume path.
A side effect of i3c_master_do_daa_ext() today is that it also
registers any newly discovered I3C devices with the driver model
inline, via i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs(). Doing that from the
resume path is problematic: a hot-join-capable device may join the bus
during this same DAA, and registering it immediately would push driver
model work (probing, sysfs, etc.) into the controller's resume context,
where the rest of the system is not yet fully resumed and the
controller driver is still partway through its own resume sequence.
Decouple discovery from registration: add a reg_work work item to
struct i3c_master_controller and have i3c_master_do_daa_ext() queue it
on master->wq (the freezable workqueue) instead of calling
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() directly. The worker performs the
registration only when the controller is not shutting_down, and is
cancelled alongside hj_work in i3c_master_shutdown(). Because wq is
freezable, any newly observed devices end up being registered after
the system has finished resuming.
i3c_master_register() also routes its initial post-bus-init registration
through reg_work, using flush_work() to keep probe-time behavior
synchronous. This keeps a single registration code path and ensures the
worker is the only writer of desc->dev.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-7-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:10 +03:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-04-08 10:28:03 -07:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-10-13 12:06:24 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-02-28 15:04:07 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Defer new-device registration out of DAA caller context
Master drivers may invoke i3c_master_do_daa_ext() during resume to
re-run Dynamic Address Assignment. As well as assigning addresses to
any newly arrived devices, this restores the dynamic address of devices
that lost it across system suspend, so it has to run as part of the
controller's resume path.
A side effect of i3c_master_do_daa_ext() today is that it also
registers any newly discovered I3C devices with the driver model
inline, via i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs(). Doing that from the
resume path is problematic: a hot-join-capable device may join the bus
during this same DAA, and registering it immediately would push driver
model work (probing, sysfs, etc.) into the controller's resume context,
where the rest of the system is not yet fully resumed and the
controller driver is still partway through its own resume sequence.
Decouple discovery from registration: add a reg_work work item to
struct i3c_master_controller and have i3c_master_do_daa_ext() queue it
on master->wq (the freezable workqueue) instead of calling
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() directly. The worker performs the
registration only when the controller is not shutting_down, and is
cancelled alongside hj_work in i3c_master_shutdown(). Because wq is
freezable, any newly observed devices end up being registered after
the system has finished resuming.
i3c_master_register() also routes its initial post-bus-init registration
through reg_work, using flush_work() to keep probe-time behavior
synchronous. This keeps a single registration code path and ensures the
worker is the only writer of desc->dev.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-7-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:10 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Defer new-device registration out of DAA caller context
Master drivers may invoke i3c_master_do_daa_ext() during resume to
re-run Dynamic Address Assignment. As well as assigning addresses to
any newly arrived devices, this restores the dynamic address of devices
that lost it across system suspend, so it has to run as part of the
controller's resume path.
A side effect of i3c_master_do_daa_ext() today is that it also
registers any newly discovered I3C devices with the driver model
inline, via i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs(). Doing that from the
resume path is problematic: a hot-join-capable device may join the bus
during this same DAA, and registering it immediately would push driver
model work (probing, sysfs, etc.) into the controller's resume context,
where the rest of the system is not yet fully resumed and the
controller driver is still partway through its own resume sequence.
Decouple discovery from registration: add a reg_work work item to
struct i3c_master_controller and have i3c_master_do_daa_ext() queue it
on master->wq (the freezable workqueue) instead of calling
i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs() directly. The worker performs the
registration only when the controller is not shutting_down, and is
cancelled alongside hj_work in i3c_master_shutdown(). Because wq is
freezable, any newly observed devices end up being registered after
the system has finished resuming.
i3c_master_register() also routes its initial post-bus-init registration
through reg_work, using flush_work() to keep probe-time behavior
synchronous. This keeps a single registration code path and ensures the
worker is the only writer of desc->dev.
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-7-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:10 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-03-19 00:33:07 +01:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2023-10-13 12:06:24 +08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: master: Ensure Hot-Join operations are stopped on shutdown
System shutdown invokes each device's bus shutdown callback to quiesce
hardware, but the I3C bus type does not currently implement one. As a
result, on shutdown the controller's Hot-Join work and any in-flight
i3c_master_do_daa() can keep running (or be newly triggered) while the
rest of the system is being torn down.
A similar window exists at i3c_master_unregister() time: cancel_work_sync()
on hj_work prevents queued work from completing, but does not stop a
fresh Hot-Join IBI from re-queueing the worker, nor a concurrent sysfs
writer from toggling Hot-Join via i3c_set_hotjoin().
Introduce a single "shutting down" gate in the I3C core, set under the
bus maintenance lock so it is observed by any in-progress DAA path
before pending work is cancelled. Install an i3c_bus_type shutdown
callback that engages this gate for master devices during system
shutdown, and use the same gate in i3c_master_unregister() so both
paths get identical guarantees.
Once the gate is engaged, the Hot-Join worker, i3c_master_do_daa_ext()
and i3c_set_hotjoin() all bail out cleanly, so Hot-Join IBIs that race
with shutdown become no-ops, direct DAA callers see -ENODEV, and sysfs
writers can no longer re-enable Hot-Join through ops->enable_hotjoin()
while the controller is going away.
No functional change for the steady-state runtime path; the new checks
only take effect once the controller has been marked as shutting down.
Note, this patch depends on patch "i3c: master: Consolidate Hot-Join DAA
work in the core".
Fixes: 3a379bbcea0af ("i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure")
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260608054312.10604-5-adrian.hunter@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
2026-06-08 08:43:08 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2023-10-13 12:06:24 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2025-12-12 17:02:55 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-02-28 15:04:07 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 15:50:59 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-11-06 12:36:00 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-11-06 12:36:00 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2025-12-03 15:45:51 -05:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2025-06-28 21:20:28 +02:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-02-21 16:37:42 -08:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-10-16 00:23:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:26:45 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:26:45 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:27:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-01-13 09:26:45 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-10-16 00:23:34 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2026-06-12 16:48:09 +05:30
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-04-05 17:41:49 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2023-04-05 17:41:49 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-01-17 17:48:16 +00:00
|
|
|
|
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Add core infrastructure to support I3C in Linux and document it.
This infrastructure adds basic I3C support. Advanced features will be
added afterwards.
There are a few design choices that are worth mentioning because they
impact the way I3C device drivers can interact with their devices:
- all functions used to send I3C/I2C frames must be called in
non-atomic context. Mainly done this way to ease implementation, but
this is not set in stone, and if anyone needs async support, new
functions can be added later on.
- the bus element is a separate object, but it's tightly coupled with
the master object. We thus have a 1:1 relationship between i3c_bus
and i3c_master_controller objects, and if 2 master controllers are
connected to the same bus and both exposed to the same Linux instance
they will appear as two distinct busses, and devices on this bus will
be exposed twice.
- I2C backward compatibility has been designed to be transparent to I2C
drivers and the I2C subsystem. The I3C master just registers an I2C
adapter which creates a new I2C bus. I'd say that, from a
representation PoV it's not ideal because what should appear as a
single I3C bus exposing I3C and I2C devices here appears as 2
different buses connected to each other through the parenting (the
I3C master is the parent of the I2C and I3C busses).
On the other hand, I don't see a better solution if we want something
that is not invasive.
Missing features:
- I3C HDR modes are not supported
- no support for multi-master and the associated concepts (mastership
handover, support for secondary masters, ...)
- I2C devices can only be described using DT because this is the only
use case I have. However, the framework can easily be extended with
ACPI and board info support
- I3C slave framework. This has been completely omitted, but shouldn't
have a huge impact on the I3C framework because I3C slaves don't see
the whole bus, it's only about handling master requests and generating
IBIs. Some of the struct, constant and enum definitions could be
shared, but most of the I3C slave framework logic will be different
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-07-19 11:52:29 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|