Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: i3c: xlnx: Add IBI and hot-join capability properties

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 18/08/2026 14:02, Patil, Shubham Sanjay wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On 8/17/2026 2:20 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> [You don't often get email from krzk@xxxxxxxxxx. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
>>
>> Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 05:21:53PM +0530, Shubham Patil wrote:
>>> In-Band Interrupt and Hot-Join are synthesis-time options of the AXI I3C
>>> IP. Describe them with two boolean properties.
>>>
>>> A Hot-Join request is acknowledged by the IBI machinery, so a hot-join
>>> capable design is always IBI capable as well. Both events are reported
>>> through the controller interrupt, which is therefore required whenever
>>> the capability is present.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Shubham Patil <shubhamsanjay.patil@xxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   .../bindings/i3c/xlnx,axi-i3c-1.0.yaml        | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
>>>
>>
>> So the same SoC using this core will have different synthesis options?
>> IOW, why isn't this implied by a specific compatible?
> 
> Yes. This core is not part of the SoC's fixed hardware: it is a design
> compiled into the FPGA fabric. When the core is added to a design in
> Vivado, IBI and Hot-Join are options that are turned on or off, so two
> builds -- or two instances in the same build -- can use the identical IP
> version and still differ in which features are present.
> 
> The compatible string identifies the IP core and its version. It says 

Well, you miss SoC compatibles so you cannot use argument of IP core.
Although I do accept argument of two instances in a SoC having this
different.

> nothing about which options were selected when
> that instance was built, so it cannot imply the capability.
> 
> Thanks,
Best regards,
Krzysztof