Re: [PATCH 1/3] can: at91_can: add dt support

[Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2539 bytes --]

On 03/11/2013 04:39 PM, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 04:12:46PM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> On 03/11/2013 10:17 AM, Ludovic Desroches wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 06:44:05PM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>>>> On 03/08/2013 06:30 PM, ludovic.desroches@atmel.com wrote:
>>>>> From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add device tree support.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/net/can/atmel-can.txt      | 14 ++++
>>>>>  drivers/net/can/at91_can.c                         | 75 ++++++++++++++++------
>>>>>  2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/atmel-can.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/atmel-can.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/atmel-can.txt
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000..69381db
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/atmel-can.txt
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
>>>>> +* AT91 CAN *
>>>>> +
>>>>> +Required properties:
>>>>> +  - compatible: Should be "atmel,at91sam9263-can" or "atmel,at91sam9x5-can"
>>>>
>>>> On imx we use the oldest SoC with that IP available. Which strategy are
>>>> you following on at91?
>>>>
>>>
>>> We are using the same strategy.
>>
>> But "atmel,at91sam9x5-can" isn't a specific SoC, probably a SoC family.
>> Or are you using "atmel,at91sam9x5-can" for the other devices in the DT,
>> too.
>>
> 
> You are right at91sam9x5 is not a specific SoC but a family of SoCs:
> at91sam9g25, at91sam9g35, at91sam9x25 and at91sam9x35. This compatible string
> is used for all the devices from and after the at91sam9x5 family: at91sam9n12,
> samad3x, etc.
> 
>> I picked at91sam9x5-can for the non devicetree driver out of the blue,
>> as there was no scheme established, yet. I'm not hanging on that name,
>> I'd rather appreciate to follow the common at91 DT rules.
> 
> It follows at91 Dt rules, we have atmel,at91sam9x5-i2c, atmel,at91sam9x5-gpio
> and others.

That's okay then, just wanted to clarify this. Can you send a v2, then
I'll apply the patches.

Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                  | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Industrial Linux Solutions        | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Vertretung West/Dortmund          | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686  | http://www.pengutronix.de   |


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 263 bytes --]