Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: i2c: Add support for ASPEED i2Cv2

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 22/02/2023 11:47, Ryan Chen wrote:
>>>> connector. That slave will keep state to drive clock stretching.
>>>>> So it is specific enable in i2c bus#1. Others is not needed enable timeout.
>>>>> Does this draw is more clear in scenario?
>>>>
>>>> I2C bus #1 works in slave mode? So you always need it for slave work?
>>>
>>> Yes, it is both slave/master mode. It is always dual role. Slave must always
>> work.
>>> Due to another board master will send.
>>
>> I meant that you need this property when it works in slave mode? It would be
>> then redundant to have in DT as it is implied by the mode.
> 
> But timeout feature is also apply in master. It for avoid suddenly slave miss(un-plug) 
> Master can timeout and release the SDA/SCL, return. 

OK, yet the property should describe the hardware, not the register
feature you want to program. You need to properly model it in DT binding
to represent hardware setup, not your desired Linux driver behavior.

>>>>> The same draw, in this case, i2c bus#1 that is multi-master transfer
>>>> architecture.
>>>>> Both will inactive with trunk data. That cane enable i2c#1 use DMA
>>>>> transfer
>>>> to reduce CPU utilized.
>>>>> Others (bus#2/3) can keep byte/buff mode.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't then current bus configuration for I2C#1 known to the driver?
>>>> Jeremy asked few other questions around here...
>>>
>>> No, The driver don't know currently board configuration.
>>
>> It knows whether it is working in multi-master/slave mode.
> 
> But in DT can decide which i2c bus number can use dma or buffer mode transfer.
> If in another i2c bus support master only, also can use dma to transfer trunk data to another slave. 

and none of these were explained in commit msg or device description.

Best regards,
Krzysztof