[PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: i3c: xlnx: Add IBI and hot-join capability properties
Patil, Shubham Sanjay
shubpati at amd.com
Tue Aug 18 03:38:44 PDT 2026
Hi Conor,
On 8/14/2026 9:08 PM, Conor Dooley wrote:
> 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 at amd.com>
>> ---
>> .../bindings/i3c/xlnx,axi-i3c-1.0.yaml | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/xlnx,axi-i3c-1.0.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/xlnx,axi-i3c-1.0.yaml
>> index 2caa245a8656..07e3d0b4d767 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/xlnx,axi-i3c-1.0.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/xlnx,axi-i3c-1.0.yaml
>> @@ -32,13 +32,34 @@ properties:
>> interrupts:
>> maxItems: 1
>>
>> + xlnx,ibi-capable:
>> + type: boolean
>> + description:
>> + The IP is synthesized with In-Band Interrupt support. IBIs are reported
>> + through the controller interrupt.
>> +
>> + xlnx,hj-capable:
>
> tbh, I'd prefer if these were spelt out a little bit more, characters
> are cheap. Not a big deal though.
Fair enough. In v2 they become xlnx,in-band-interrupt-capable and
xlnx,hot-join-capable, and I have expanded both descriptions to say what
the features actually do.
>
>> + type: boolean
>> + description:
>> + The IP is synthesized with Hot-Join support. A Hot-Join request is
>> + acknowledged by the same machinery as an In-Band Interrupt.
>> +
>> required:
>> - compatible
>> - reg
>> - clocks
>>
>> +dependencies:
>> + xlnx,hj-capable: ["xlnx,ibi-capable"]
>> +
>> allOf:
>> - $ref: i3c.yaml#
>> + - if:
>> + required:
>> + - xlnx,ibi-capable
>> + then:
>> + required:
>> + - interrupts
>
> Why is one dependency expressed this way, and the other expressed using
> the dependencies property? Can the interrupts property be handled that
> way too?
No reason other than an oversight on my part, and yes it can. Both are
expressed with dependencies in v2.
Thanks,
Shubham
>
> Cheers,
> Conor.
>
>>
>> unevaluatedProperties: false
>>
>> @@ -54,5 +75,7 @@ examples:
>> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 89 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> #address-cells = <3>;
>> #size-cells = <0>;
>> + xlnx,ibi-capable;
>> + xlnx,hj-capable;
>> };
>> ...
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
More information about the linux-i3c
mailing list