The current SMBus Host Notify implementation relies on .alert() to
relay its notifications. However, the use cases where SMBus Host
Notify is needed currently is to signal data ready on touchpads.
This is closer to an IRQ than a custom API through .alert().
Given that the 2 touchpad manufacturers (Synaptics and Elan) that
use SMBus Host Notify don't put any data in the SMBus payload, the
concept actually matches one to one.
Benefits are multiple:
- simpler code and API: the client will just have an IRQ, and
nothing needs to be added in the adapter beside internally
enabling it.
- no more specific workqueue, the threading is handled by IRQ core
directly (when required)
- no more races when removing the device (the drivers are already
required to disable irq on remove)
- simpler handling for drivers: use plain regular IRQs
- no more dependency on i2c-smbus for i2c-i801 (and any other adapter)
- the IRQ domain is created automatically when the adapter exports
the Host Notify capability
- the IRQ are assign only if ACPI, OF and the caller did not assign
one already
- the domain is automatically destroyed on remove
- fewer lines of code (minus 20, yeah!)
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Drivers which use the SMBus extensions select I2C_SMBUS, so the
stubs are not needed.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
SMBus Host Notify allows a slave device to act as a master on a bus to
notify the host of an interrupt. On Intel chipsets, the functionality
is directly implemented in the firmware. We just need to export a
function to call .alert() on the proper device driver.
i2c_handle_smbus_host_notify() behaves like i2c_handle_smbus_alert().
When called, it schedules a task that will be able to sleep to go through
the list of devices attached to the adapter.
The current implementation allows one Host Notification to be scheduled
while an other is running.
Tested-by: Andrew Duggan <aduggan@synaptics.com>
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
SMBus alert support. The SMBus alert protocol allows several SMBus
slave devices to share a single interrupt pin on the SMBus master,
while still allowing the master to know which slave triggered the
interrupt.
This is based on preliminary work by David Brownell. The key
difference between David's implementation and mine is that his was
part of i2c-core, while mine is split into a separate, standalone
module named i2c-smbus. The i2c-smbus module is meant to include
support for all SMBus extensions to the I2C protocol in the future.
The benefit of this approach is a zero cost for I2C bus segments which
do not need SMBus alert support. Where David's implementation
increased the size of struct i2c_adapter by 7% (40 bytes on i386),
mine doesn't touch it. Where David's implementation added over 150
lines of code to i2c-core (+10%), mine doesn't touch it. The only
change that touches all the users of the i2c subsystem is a new
callback in struct i2c_driver (common to both implementations.) I seem
to remember Trent was worried about the footprint of David'd
implementation, hopefully mine addresses the issue.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: David Brownell <dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@freescale.com>
Benjamin Tissoires