All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
	U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>,
	PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 5/5] powerpc: Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:40:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E42D09E.4080405@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110810183016.GY4926@sgi.com>

On 08/10/2011 01:30 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:36:22PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 08/10/2011 12:19 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:56:28AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>>>> Also may want to list fsl,p1010-rdb as a "canonical compatible" for
>>>> anything which is backwards compatible with p1010's implementation.
>>>
>>> How do I specify 'canonical compatible'?
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>>   compatible: Should be "fsl,<processor>-flexcan" and "fsl,flexcan".
>>
>>   An implementation should also claim any of the following compatibles
>>   that it is fully backwards compatible with:
>>
>>   - fsl,p1010-rdb

Gah, I don't know how "rdb" replaced "flexcan" in the above.  Sorry for
any confusion.

> I am so confused.  fsl,p1010-flexcan refers, in my mind at least, to
> a particular chiplet on the p1010 freescale processor. 

It refers to a particular version of the flexcan logic, for which the
hardware doc people weren't kind enough to give us a public version number.

It has been common and recommended practice in such cases, when there
are multiple chips containing the same device, to pick a canonical chip
(such as the first one to have the device or to be supported) and have
others claim compatibility with it.

> fsl,p1010-rdb
> would mean nothing to me as that is a p1010 processor with two flexcan
> chiplets wired to a pair of DB-9 jacks.  For the driver, what additional
> information is being conveyed?

The programming model of the flexcan chiplet.

> Let's cut to the chase.  Here is what I have after incorporating your
> earlier comment about the compatible line.  Please mark this up to
> exactly what you are asking for.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Flexcan CAN contoller on Freescale's ARM and PowerPC processors
> 
> Required properties:
> 
> - compatible : Should be "fsl,<processor>-flexcan" and "fsl,flexcan"

   An implementation should also claim any of the following compatibles
   that it is fully backwards compatible with:

   - fsl,p1010-flexcan

> - reg : Offset and length of the register set for this device
> - interrupts : Interrupt tuple for this device
> 
> Example:
> 
>   can@1c000 {
>           compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan";
>           reg = <0x1c000 0x1000>;
>           interrupts = <48 0x2>;
>           interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
>   };
> 

-Scott

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>,
	U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
	socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 5/5] powerpc: Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:40:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E42D09E.4080405@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110810183016.GY4926@sgi.com>

On 08/10/2011 01:30 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:36:22PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 08/10/2011 12:19 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:56:28AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>>>> Also may want to list fsl,p1010-rdb as a "canonical compatible" for
>>>> anything which is backwards compatible with p1010's implementation.
>>>
>>> How do I specify 'canonical compatible'?
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>>   compatible: Should be "fsl,<processor>-flexcan" and "fsl,flexcan".
>>
>>   An implementation should also claim any of the following compatibles
>>   that it is fully backwards compatible with:
>>
>>   - fsl,p1010-rdb

Gah, I don't know how "rdb" replaced "flexcan" in the above.  Sorry for
any confusion.

> I am so confused.  fsl,p1010-flexcan refers, in my mind at least, to
> a particular chiplet on the p1010 freescale processor. 

It refers to a particular version of the flexcan logic, for which the
hardware doc people weren't kind enough to give us a public version number.

It has been common and recommended practice in such cases, when there
are multiple chips containing the same device, to pick a canonical chip
(such as the first one to have the device or to be supported) and have
others claim compatibility with it.

> fsl,p1010-rdb
> would mean nothing to me as that is a p1010 processor with two flexcan
> chiplets wired to a pair of DB-9 jacks.  For the driver, what additional
> information is being conveyed?

The programming model of the flexcan chiplet.

> Let's cut to the chase.  Here is what I have after incorporating your
> earlier comment about the compatible line.  Please mark this up to
> exactly what you are asking for.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Flexcan CAN contoller on Freescale's ARM and PowerPC processors
> 
> Required properties:
> 
> - compatible : Should be "fsl,<processor>-flexcan" and "fsl,flexcan"

   An implementation should also claim any of the following compatibles
   that it is fully backwards compatible with:

   - fsl,p1010-flexcan

> - reg : Offset and length of the register set for this device
> - interrupts : Interrupt tuple for this device
> 
> Example:
> 
>   can@1c000 {
>           compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan";
>           reg = <0x1c000 0x1000>;
>           interrupts = <48 0x2>;
>           interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
>   };
> 

-Scott


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>,
	U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
	<socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	<devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 5/5] powerpc: Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:40:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E42D09E.4080405@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110810183016.GY4926@sgi.com>

On 08/10/2011 01:30 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:36:22PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 08/10/2011 12:19 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:56:28AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>>>> Also may want to list fsl,p1010-rdb as a "canonical compatible" for
>>>> anything which is backwards compatible with p1010's implementation.
>>>
>>> How do I specify 'canonical compatible'?
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>>   compatible: Should be "fsl,<processor>-flexcan" and "fsl,flexcan".
>>
>>   An implementation should also claim any of the following compatibles
>>   that it is fully backwards compatible with:
>>
>>   - fsl,p1010-rdb

Gah, I don't know how "rdb" replaced "flexcan" in the above.  Sorry for
any confusion.

> I am so confused.  fsl,p1010-flexcan refers, in my mind at least, to
> a particular chiplet on the p1010 freescale processor. 

It refers to a particular version of the flexcan logic, for which the
hardware doc people weren't kind enough to give us a public version number.

It has been common and recommended practice in such cases, when there
are multiple chips containing the same device, to pick a canonical chip
(such as the first one to have the device or to be supported) and have
others claim compatibility with it.

> fsl,p1010-rdb
> would mean nothing to me as that is a p1010 processor with two flexcan
> chiplets wired to a pair of DB-9 jacks.  For the driver, what additional
> information is being conveyed?

The programming model of the flexcan chiplet.

> Let's cut to the chase.  Here is what I have after incorporating your
> earlier comment about the compatible line.  Please mark this up to
> exactly what you are asking for.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Flexcan CAN contoller on Freescale's ARM and PowerPC processors
> 
> Required properties:
> 
> - compatible : Should be "fsl,<processor>-flexcan" and "fsl,flexcan"

   An implementation should also claim any of the following compatibles
   that it is fully backwards compatible with:

   - fsl,p1010-flexcan

> - reg : Offset and length of the register set for this device
> - interrupts : Interrupt tuple for this device
> 
> Example:
> 
>   can@1c000 {
>           compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan";
>           reg = <0x1c000 0x1000>;
>           interrupts = <48 0x2>;
>           interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
>   };
> 

-Scott


  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-10 18:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-10 16:27 [PATCH v11 0/5] flexcan/powerpc: Add support for powerpc flexcan (freescale p1010) Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27 ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27 ` [PATCH v11 1/5] flexcan: Remove #include <mach/clock.h> Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27   ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27 ` [PATCH v11 2/5] flexcan: Abstract off read/write for big/little endian Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27   ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27 ` [PATCH v11 3/5] flexcan: Add of_match to platform_device definition Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27   ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27   ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27 ` [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc: Add flexcan device support for p1010rdb Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27   ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 17:01   ` Kumar Gala
2011-08-10 17:01     ` Kumar Gala
2011-08-10 18:16     ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-10 18:16       ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-11  3:56       ` Robin Holt
2011-08-11  3:56         ` Robin Holt
2011-08-11  7:35         ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-11  7:35           ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-11  4:46       ` Kumar Gala
2011-08-11  4:46         ` Kumar Gala
2011-08-11  7:26         ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-11  7:26           ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-11 10:42         ` Robin Holt
2011-08-11 10:42           ` Robin Holt
2011-08-11 14:17           ` Kumar Gala
2011-08-11 14:17             ` Kumar Gala
2011-08-10 16:27 ` [PATCH v11 5/5] powerpc: Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27   ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:27   ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 16:56   ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 16:56     ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 16:56     ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 17:19     ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 17:19       ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 17:36       ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 17:36         ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 17:36         ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 18:30         ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 18:30           ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 18:40           ` Scott Wood [this message]
2011-08-10 18:40             ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 18:40             ` Scott Wood
2011-08-10 18:45             ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 18:45               ` Robin Holt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4E42D09E.4080405@freescale.com \
    --to=scottwood@freescale.com \
    --cc=B22300@freescale.com \
    --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.