Documentation / i2c / slave-interface.rst


Based on kernel version 6.10. Page generated on 2024-07-16 09:00 EST.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201
=====================================
Linux I2C slave interface description
=====================================

by Wolfram Sang <wsa@sang-engineering.com> in 2014-15

Linux can also be an I2C slave if the I2C controller in use has slave
functionality. For that to work, one needs slave support in the bus driver plus
a hardware independent software backend providing the actual functionality. An
example for the latter is the slave-eeprom driver, which acts as a dual memory
driver. While another I2C master on the bus can access it like a regular
EEPROM, the Linux I2C slave can access the content via sysfs and handle data as
needed. The backend driver and the I2C bus driver communicate via events. Here
is a small graph visualizing the data flow and the means by which data is
transported. The dotted line marks only one example. The backend could also
use a character device, be in-kernel only, or something completely different::


              e.g. sysfs        I2C slave events        I/O registers
  +-----------+   v    +---------+     v     +--------+  v  +------------+
  | Userspace +........+ Backend +-----------+ Driver +-----+ Controller |
  +-----------+        +---------+           +--------+     +------------+
                                                                | |
  ----------------------------------------------------------------+--  I2C
  --------------------------------------------------------------+----  Bus

Note: Technically, there is also the I2C core between the backend and the
driver. However, at this time of writing, the layer is transparent.


User manual
===========

I2C slave backends behave like standard I2C clients. So, you can instantiate
them as described in the document instantiating-devices.rst. The only
difference is that i2c slave backends have their own address space. So, you
have to add 0x1000 to the address you would originally request. An example for
instantiating the slave-eeprom driver from userspace at the 7 bit address 0x64
on bus 1::

  # echo slave-24c02 0x1064 > /sys/bus/i2c/devices/i2c-1/new_device

Each backend should come with separate documentation to describe its specific
behaviour and setup.


Developer manual
================

First, the events which are used by the bus driver and the backend will be
described in detail. After that, some implementation hints for extending bus
drivers and writing backends will be given.


I2C slave events
----------------

The bus driver sends an event to the backend using the following function::

	ret = i2c_slave_event(client, event, &val)

'client' describes the I2C slave device. 'event' is one of the special event
types described hereafter. 'val' holds an u8 value for the data byte to be
read/written and is thus bidirectional. The pointer to val must always be
provided even if val is not used for an event, i.e. don't use NULL here. 'ret'
is the return value from the backend. Mandatory events must be provided by the
bus drivers and must be checked for by backend drivers.

Event types:

* I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_REQUESTED (mandatory)

  'val': unused

  'ret': 0 if the backend is ready, otherwise some errno

Another I2C master wants to write data to us. This event should be sent once
our own address and the write bit was detected. The data did not arrive yet, so
there is nothing to process or return. After returning, the bus driver must
always ack the address phase. If 'ret' is zero, backend initialization or
wakeup is done and further data may be received. If 'ret' is an errno, the bus
driver should nack all incoming bytes until the next stop condition to enforce
a retry of the transmission.

* I2C_SLAVE_READ_REQUESTED (mandatory)

  'val': backend returns first byte to be sent

  'ret': always 0

Another I2C master wants to read data from us. This event should be sent once
our own address and the read bit was detected. After returning, the bus driver
should transmit the first byte.

* I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_RECEIVED (mandatory)

  'val': bus driver delivers received byte

  'ret': 0 if the byte should be acked, some errno if the byte should be nacked

Another I2C master has sent a byte to us which needs to be set in 'val'. If 'ret'
is zero, the bus driver should ack this byte. If 'ret' is an errno, then the byte
should be nacked.

* I2C_SLAVE_READ_PROCESSED (mandatory)

  'val': backend returns next byte to be sent

  'ret': always 0

The bus driver requests the next byte to be sent to another I2C master in
'val'. Important: This does not mean that the previous byte has been acked, it
only means that the previous byte is shifted out to the bus! To ensure seamless
transmission, most hardware requests the next byte when the previous one is
still shifted out. If the master sends NACK and stops reading after the byte
currently shifted out, this byte requested here is never used. It very likely
needs to be sent again on the next I2C_SLAVE_READ_REQUEST, depending a bit on
your backend, though.

* I2C_SLAVE_STOP (mandatory)

  'val': unused

  'ret': always 0

A stop condition was received. This can happen anytime and the backend should
reset its state machine for I2C transfers to be able to receive new requests.


Software backends
-----------------

If you want to write a software backend:

* use a standard i2c_driver and its matching mechanisms
* write the slave_callback which handles the above slave events
  (best using a state machine)
* register this callback via i2c_slave_register()

Check the i2c-slave-eeprom driver as an example.


Bus driver support
------------------

If you want to add slave support to the bus driver:

* implement calls to register/unregister the slave and add those to the
  struct i2c_algorithm. When registering, you probably need to set the I2C
  slave address and enable slave specific interrupts. If you use runtime pm, you
  should use pm_runtime_get_sync() because your device usually needs to be
  powered on always to be able to detect its slave address. When unregistering,
  do the inverse of the above.

* Catch the slave interrupts and send appropriate i2c_slave_events to the backend.

Note that most hardware supports being master _and_ slave on the same bus. So,
if you extend a bus driver, please make sure that the driver supports that as
well. In almost all cases, slave support does not need to disable the master
functionality.

Check the i2c-rcar driver as an example.


About ACK/NACK
--------------

It is good behaviour to always ACK the address phase, so the master knows if a
device is basically present or if it mysteriously disappeared. Using NACK to
state being busy is troublesome. SMBus demands to always ACK the address phase,
while the I2C specification is more loose on that. Most I2C controllers also
automatically ACK when detecting their slave addresses, so there is no option
to NACK them. For those reasons, this API does not support NACK in the address
phase.

Currently, there is no slave event to report if the master did ACK or NACK a
byte when it reads from us. We could make this an optional event if the need
arises. However, cases should be extremely rare because the master is expected
to send STOP after that and we have an event for that. Also, keep in mind not
all I2C controllers have the possibility to report that event.


About buffers
-------------

During development of this API, the question of using buffers instead of just
bytes came up. Such an extension might be possible, usefulness is unclear at
this time of writing. Some points to keep in mind when using buffers:

* Buffers should be opt-in and backend drivers will always have to support
  byte-based transactions as the ultimate fallback anyhow because this is how
  the majority of HW works.

* For backends simulating hardware registers, buffers are largely not helpful
  because after each byte written an action should be immediately triggered.
  For reads, the data kept in the buffer might get stale if the backend just
  updated a register because of internal processing.

* A master can send STOP at any time. For partially transferred buffers, this
  means additional code to handle this exception. Such code tends to be
  error-prone.