lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 2/5] i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
Le Tue, 1 Aug 2017 19:27:03 +0200,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> a écrit :

> > I'm surprised they didn't allow for slave clock stretching when
> > communicating with a legacy i2c device, it will prohibit use of a rather
> > large class of devices. :(
>
> Yes, but I3C is push/pull IIRC.

It is.

>
> > As for interrupts you are always free to wire up an out-of-band
> > interrupt like before. :)
>
> Yes, my wording was a bit too strong. It is possible, sure. Yet, I
> understood that one of the features of I3C is to have in-band interrupt
> support. We will see if the demand for backward compatibility or "saving
> pins" is higher.
>

Indeed, you can use in-band interrupts if your device is able to
generate them, but that doesn't prevent I3C device designers from using
an external pin to signal interrupts if they prefer.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-01 23:48    [W:0.077 / U:3.968 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site