Re: [PATCHv7 1/3] dt-bindings: i2c: document bindings for i2c-slave-mqueue

[Wolfram Sang]

> > +===============================================
> > +Device Tree for I2C slave message queue backend
> > +===============================================
> > +
> > +Some protocols over I2C/SMBus are designed for bi-directional transferring
> > +messages by using I2C Master Write protocol. This requires that both sides
> > +of the communication have slave addresses.
> 
> So the address 0x10 in the example below is the address of the I2C 
> controller?

Yes.

> > +This I2C slave mqueue (message queue) is used to receive and queue
> > +messages from the remote i2c intelligent device; and it will add the target
> > +slave address (with R/W# bit is always 0) into the message at the first byte.
> > +
> > +Links
> > +----
> > +`Intelligent Platform Management Bus
> > +Communications Protocol Specification
> > +<https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/product-briefs/ipmp-spec-v1.0.pdf>`_
> > +
> > +`Management Component Transport Protocol (MCTP)
> > +SMBus/I2C Transport Binding Specification
> > +<https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0237_1.1.0.pdf>`_
> > +
> > +Required Properties:
> > +- compatible		: should be "i2c-slave-mqueue"
> 
> There is no mention of mqueue (or queue) in these specs. Where does that 
> come from? Perhaps something more closely matching the protocol would be 
> better name.
> 
> > +- reg			: slave address
> > +
> > +Example:
> > +
> > +i2c {
> 
> Would there be other slaves? 
> 
> The common binding states 'multi-master' property should be present. 
> 
> I need a more complete example.

Ack. Either that or a bit more explanation, e.g. if sending
packets is planned from userspace?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature