From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
To: Dong Aisheng <b29396@freescale.com>, linux-can@vger.kernel.org
Cc: wg@grandegger.com, socketcan@hartkopp.net,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
mark.rutland@arm.com, varkabhadram@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] can: m_can: add Bosch M_CAN controller support
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 14:13:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C3C97A.7080102@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1405338041-19945-2-git-send-email-b29396@freescale.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8281 bytes --]
On 07/14/2014 01:40 PM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> The patch adds the basic CAN TX/RX function support for Bosch M_CAN controller.
> For TX, only one dedicated tx buffer is used for sending data.
> For RX, RXFIFO 0 is used for receiving data to avoid overflow.
> Rx FIFO 1 and Rx Buffers are not used currently, as well as Tx Event FIFO.
>
> Due to the message ram can be shared by multi m_can instances
> and the fifo element is configurable which is SoC dependant,
> the design is to parse the message ram related configuration data from device
> tree rather than hardcode define it in driver which can make the message
> ram sharing fully transparent to M_CAN controller driver,
> then we can gain better driver maintainability and future features upgrade.
>
> M_CAN also supports CANFD protocol features like data payload up to 64 bytes
> and bitrate switch at runtime, however, this patch still does not add the
> support for these features.
>
> Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
> Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
> Cc: Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <b29396@freescale.com>
[...]
> +static inline u32 m_can_fifo_read(const struct m_can_priv *priv,
> + u32 fgi, unsigned int offset)
> +{
> + return readl(priv->mram_base + priv->mcfg[MRAM_RXF0].off +
> + fgi * RXF0_ELEMENT_SIZE + offset);
> +}
Can you add a similar function for fifo_write, please?
> +
> +static inline void m_can_config_endisable(const struct m_can_priv *priv,
> + bool enable)
> +{
> + u32 cccr = m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_CCCR);
> + u32 timeout = 10;
> + u32 val = 0;
> +
> + if (enable) {
> + /* enable m_can configuration */
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_CCCR, cccr | CCCR_INIT);
> + /* CCCR.CCE can only be set/reset while CCCR.INIT = '1' */
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_CCCR, cccr | CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE);
> + } else {
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_CCCR, cccr & ~(CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE));
> + }
> +
> + /* there's a delay for module initialization */
> + if (enable)
> + val = CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE;
> +
> + while ((m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_CCCR) & (CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE))
> + != val) {
> + if (timeout == 0) {
> + netdev_warn(priv->dev, "Failed to init module\n");
> + return;
> + }
> + timeout--;
> + udelay(1);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static inline void m_can_enable_all_interrupts(const struct m_can_priv *priv)
> +{
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_ILE, ILE_EINT0 | ILE_EINT1);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void m_can_disable_all_interrupts(const struct m_can_priv *priv)
> +{
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_ILE, 0x0);
> +}
> +
> +static void m_can_read_fifo(const struct net_device *dev, struct can_frame *cf,
> + u32 rxfs)
> +{
> + struct m_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> + u32 flags, fgi;
> +
> + /* calculate the fifo get index for where to read data */
> + fgi = (rxfs & RXFS_FGI_MASK) >> RXFS_FGI_OFF;
> + flags = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0x0);
^^^
Can you introduce an enum for the offsets, please adjust the signature
of m_can_fifo_read() accordingly.
> + if (flags & RX_BUF_XTD)
> + cf->can_id = (flags & CAN_EFF_MASK) | CAN_EFF_FLAG;
> + else
> + cf->can_id = (flags >> 18) & CAN_SFF_MASK;
> +
> + if (flags & RX_BUF_RTR) {
> + cf->can_id |= CAN_RTR_FLAG;
> + } else {
> + flags = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0x4);
> + cf->can_dlc = get_can_dlc((flags >> 16) & 0x0F);
> + *(u32 *)(cf->data + 0) = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0x8);
> + *(u32 *)(cf->data + 4) = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0xC);
> + }
> +
> + /* acknowledge rx fifo 0 */
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_RXF0A, fgi);
> +}
> +
> +static int m_can_do_rx_poll(struct net_device *dev, int quota)
> +{
> + struct m_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> + struct net_device_stats *stats = &dev->stats;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> + struct can_frame *frame;
> + u32 pkts = 0;
> + u32 rxfs;
> +
> + rxfs = m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_RXF0S);
> + if (!(rxfs & RXFS_FFL_MASK)) {
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "no messages in fifo0\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + while ((rxfs & RXFS_FFL_MASK) && (quota > 0)) {
> + if (rxfs & RXFS_RFL)
> + netdev_warn(dev, "Rx FIFO 0 Message Lost\n");
> +
> + skb = alloc_can_skb(dev, &frame);
> + if (!skb) {
> + stats->rx_dropped++;
> + return 0;
return pkts;
- or -
goto out;
> + }
> +
> + m_can_read_fifo(dev, frame, rxfs);
> +
> + stats->rx_packets++;
> + stats->rx_bytes += frame->can_dlc;
> +
> + netif_receive_skb(skb);
> +
> + quota--;
> + pkts++;
> + rxfs = m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_RXF0S);
> + };
> +
out:
> + if (pkts)
> + can_led_event(dev, CAN_LED_EVENT_RX);
> +
> + return pkts;
> +}
> +
[...]
> +static int m_can_handle_lec_err(struct net_device *dev,
> + enum m_can_lec_type lec_type)
> +{
> + struct m_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> + struct net_device_stats *stats = &dev->stats;
> + struct can_frame *cf;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> +
> + /* early exit if no lec update */
> + if (lec_type == LEC_UNUSED)
> + return 0;
I think this is not needed, as checked by the only caller.
> +
> + if (!(priv->can.ctrlmode & CAN_CTRLMODE_BERR_REPORTING))
> + return 0;
Can you move this to the caller, too?
> +
> + priv->can.can_stats.bus_error++;
> + stats->rx_errors++;
> +
> + /* propagate the error condition to the CAN stack */
> + skb = alloc_can_err_skb(dev, &cf);
> + if (unlikely(!skb))
> + return 0;
> +
> + /* check for 'last error code' which tells us the
> + * type of the last error to occur on the CAN bus
> + */
> + cf->can_id |= CAN_ERR_PROT | CAN_ERR_BUSERROR;
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_UNSPEC;
> +
> + switch (lec_type) {
> + case LEC_STUFF_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "stuff error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_STUFF;
> + break;
> + case LEC_FORM_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "form error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_FORM;
> + break;
> + case LEC_ACK_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "ack error\n");
> + cf->data[3] |= (CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_ACK |
> + CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_ACK_DEL);
> + break;
> + case LEC_BIT1_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "bit1 error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_BIT1;
> + break;
> + case LEC_BIT0_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "bit0 error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_BIT0;
> + break;
> + case LEC_CRC_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "CRC error\n");
> + cf->data[3] |= (CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_CRC_SEQ |
> + CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_CRC_DEL);
> + break;
> + default:
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + stats->rx_packets++;
> + stats->rx_bytes += cf->can_dlc;
> + netif_receive_skb(skb);
> +
> + return 1;
> +}
> +
[...]
> +static void m_can_handle_other_err(struct net_device *dev, u32 irqstatus)
> +{
> + if (irqstatus & IR_WDI)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Message RAM Watchdog event due to missing READY\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_BEU)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Error Logging Overflow\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_BEU)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Bit Error Uncorrected\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_BEC)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Bit Error Corrected\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_TOO)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Timeout reached\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_MRAF)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Message RAM access failure occurred\n");
> +}
Have you ever seen these error messages? Better rate limit these, though.
> +
> +static int m_can_handle_bus_errors(struct net_device *dev, u32 irqstatus,
> + u32 psr)
> +{
> + int work_done = 0;
> +
> + if (irqstatus & IR_RF0L)
> + work_done += m_can_handle_lost_msg(dev);
> +
> + /* handle lec errors on the bus */
> + if (psr & LEC_UNUSED)
> + work_done += m_can_handle_lec_err(dev,
> + psr & LEC_UNUSED);
> +
> + /* other unproccessed error interrupts */
> + m_can_handle_other_err(dev, irqstatus);
> +
> + return work_done;
> +}
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: 242 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: mkl@pengutronix.de (Marc Kleine-Budde)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/2] can: m_can: add Bosch M_CAN controller support
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 14:13:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C3C97A.7080102@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1405338041-19945-2-git-send-email-b29396@freescale.com>
On 07/14/2014 01:40 PM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> The patch adds the basic CAN TX/RX function support for Bosch M_CAN controller.
> For TX, only one dedicated tx buffer is used for sending data.
> For RX, RXFIFO 0 is used for receiving data to avoid overflow.
> Rx FIFO 1 and Rx Buffers are not used currently, as well as Tx Event FIFO.
>
> Due to the message ram can be shared by multi m_can instances
> and the fifo element is configurable which is SoC dependant,
> the design is to parse the message ram related configuration data from device
> tree rather than hardcode define it in driver which can make the message
> ram sharing fully transparent to M_CAN controller driver,
> then we can gain better driver maintainability and future features upgrade.
>
> M_CAN also supports CANFD protocol features like data payload up to 64 bytes
> and bitrate switch at runtime, however, this patch still does not add the
> support for these features.
>
> Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
> Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
> Cc: Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <b29396@freescale.com>
[...]
> +static inline u32 m_can_fifo_read(const struct m_can_priv *priv,
> + u32 fgi, unsigned int offset)
> +{
> + return readl(priv->mram_base + priv->mcfg[MRAM_RXF0].off +
> + fgi * RXF0_ELEMENT_SIZE + offset);
> +}
Can you add a similar function for fifo_write, please?
> +
> +static inline void m_can_config_endisable(const struct m_can_priv *priv,
> + bool enable)
> +{
> + u32 cccr = m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_CCCR);
> + u32 timeout = 10;
> + u32 val = 0;
> +
> + if (enable) {
> + /* enable m_can configuration */
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_CCCR, cccr | CCCR_INIT);
> + /* CCCR.CCE can only be set/reset while CCCR.INIT = '1' */
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_CCCR, cccr | CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE);
> + } else {
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_CCCR, cccr & ~(CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE));
> + }
> +
> + /* there's a delay for module initialization */
> + if (enable)
> + val = CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE;
> +
> + while ((m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_CCCR) & (CCCR_INIT | CCCR_CCE))
> + != val) {
> + if (timeout == 0) {
> + netdev_warn(priv->dev, "Failed to init module\n");
> + return;
> + }
> + timeout--;
> + udelay(1);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static inline void m_can_enable_all_interrupts(const struct m_can_priv *priv)
> +{
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_ILE, ILE_EINT0 | ILE_EINT1);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void m_can_disable_all_interrupts(const struct m_can_priv *priv)
> +{
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_ILE, 0x0);
> +}
> +
> +static void m_can_read_fifo(const struct net_device *dev, struct can_frame *cf,
> + u32 rxfs)
> +{
> + struct m_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> + u32 flags, fgi;
> +
> + /* calculate the fifo get index for where to read data */
> + fgi = (rxfs & RXFS_FGI_MASK) >> RXFS_FGI_OFF;
> + flags = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0x0);
^^^
Can you introduce an enum for the offsets, please adjust the signature
of m_can_fifo_read() accordingly.
> + if (flags & RX_BUF_XTD)
> + cf->can_id = (flags & CAN_EFF_MASK) | CAN_EFF_FLAG;
> + else
> + cf->can_id = (flags >> 18) & CAN_SFF_MASK;
> +
> + if (flags & RX_BUF_RTR) {
> + cf->can_id |= CAN_RTR_FLAG;
> + } else {
> + flags = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0x4);
> + cf->can_dlc = get_can_dlc((flags >> 16) & 0x0F);
> + *(u32 *)(cf->data + 0) = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0x8);
> + *(u32 *)(cf->data + 4) = m_can_fifo_read(priv, fgi, 0xC);
> + }
> +
> + /* acknowledge rx fifo 0 */
> + m_can_write(priv, M_CAN_RXF0A, fgi);
> +}
> +
> +static int m_can_do_rx_poll(struct net_device *dev, int quota)
> +{
> + struct m_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> + struct net_device_stats *stats = &dev->stats;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> + struct can_frame *frame;
> + u32 pkts = 0;
> + u32 rxfs;
> +
> + rxfs = m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_RXF0S);
> + if (!(rxfs & RXFS_FFL_MASK)) {
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "no messages in fifo0\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + while ((rxfs & RXFS_FFL_MASK) && (quota > 0)) {
> + if (rxfs & RXFS_RFL)
> + netdev_warn(dev, "Rx FIFO 0 Message Lost\n");
> +
> + skb = alloc_can_skb(dev, &frame);
> + if (!skb) {
> + stats->rx_dropped++;
> + return 0;
return pkts;
- or -
goto out;
> + }
> +
> + m_can_read_fifo(dev, frame, rxfs);
> +
> + stats->rx_packets++;
> + stats->rx_bytes += frame->can_dlc;
> +
> + netif_receive_skb(skb);
> +
> + quota--;
> + pkts++;
> + rxfs = m_can_read(priv, M_CAN_RXF0S);
> + };
> +
out:
> + if (pkts)
> + can_led_event(dev, CAN_LED_EVENT_RX);
> +
> + return pkts;
> +}
> +
[...]
> +static int m_can_handle_lec_err(struct net_device *dev,
> + enum m_can_lec_type lec_type)
> +{
> + struct m_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> + struct net_device_stats *stats = &dev->stats;
> + struct can_frame *cf;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> +
> + /* early exit if no lec update */
> + if (lec_type == LEC_UNUSED)
> + return 0;
I think this is not needed, as checked by the only caller.
> +
> + if (!(priv->can.ctrlmode & CAN_CTRLMODE_BERR_REPORTING))
> + return 0;
Can you move this to the caller, too?
> +
> + priv->can.can_stats.bus_error++;
> + stats->rx_errors++;
> +
> + /* propagate the error condition to the CAN stack */
> + skb = alloc_can_err_skb(dev, &cf);
> + if (unlikely(!skb))
> + return 0;
> +
> + /* check for 'last error code' which tells us the
> + * type of the last error to occur on the CAN bus
> + */
> + cf->can_id |= CAN_ERR_PROT | CAN_ERR_BUSERROR;
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_UNSPEC;
> +
> + switch (lec_type) {
> + case LEC_STUFF_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "stuff error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_STUFF;
> + break;
> + case LEC_FORM_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "form error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_FORM;
> + break;
> + case LEC_ACK_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "ack error\n");
> + cf->data[3] |= (CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_ACK |
> + CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_ACK_DEL);
> + break;
> + case LEC_BIT1_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "bit1 error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_BIT1;
> + break;
> + case LEC_BIT0_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "bit0 error\n");
> + cf->data[2] |= CAN_ERR_PROT_BIT0;
> + break;
> + case LEC_CRC_ERROR:
> + netdev_dbg(dev, "CRC error\n");
> + cf->data[3] |= (CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_CRC_SEQ |
> + CAN_ERR_PROT_LOC_CRC_DEL);
> + break;
> + default:
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + stats->rx_packets++;
> + stats->rx_bytes += cf->can_dlc;
> + netif_receive_skb(skb);
> +
> + return 1;
> +}
> +
[...]
> +static void m_can_handle_other_err(struct net_device *dev, u32 irqstatus)
> +{
> + if (irqstatus & IR_WDI)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Message RAM Watchdog event due to missing READY\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_BEU)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Error Logging Overflow\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_BEU)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Bit Error Uncorrected\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_BEC)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Bit Error Corrected\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_TOO)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Timeout reached\n");
> + if (irqstatus & IR_MRAF)
> + netdev_err(dev, "Message RAM access failure occurred\n");
> +}
Have you ever seen these error messages? Better rate limit these, though.
> +
> +static int m_can_handle_bus_errors(struct net_device *dev, u32 irqstatus,
> + u32 psr)
> +{
> + int work_done = 0;
> +
> + if (irqstatus & IR_RF0L)
> + work_done += m_can_handle_lost_msg(dev);
> +
> + /* handle lec errors on the bus */
> + if (psr & LEC_UNUSED)
> + work_done += m_can_handle_lec_err(dev,
> + psr & LEC_UNUSED);
> +
> + /* other unproccessed error interrupts */
> + m_can_handle_other_err(dev, irqstatus);
> +
> + return work_done;
> +}
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 |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 242 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20140714/26cad4f2/attachment-0001.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-14 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-14 11:40 [PATCH v4 1/2] can: m_can: add device tree binding documentation Dong Aisheng
2014-07-14 11:40 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-14 11:40 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] can: m_can: add Bosch M_CAN controller support Dong Aisheng
2014-07-14 11:40 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-14 12:13 ` Marc Kleine-Budde [this message]
2014-07-14 12:13 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 3:33 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 3:33 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 7:29 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 7:29 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 8:26 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 8:26 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 8:46 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 8:46 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 9:07 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 9:07 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 9:21 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 9:21 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 10:40 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 10:40 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-14 12:47 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-14 12:47 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-14 13:01 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-14 13:01 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-14 13:15 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-14 13:15 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-15 6:28 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 6:28 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 6:27 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 6:27 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 6:56 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-15 6:56 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-15 7:10 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 7:10 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 7:15 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-15 7:15 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-15 7:14 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 7:14 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 7:20 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-15 7:20 ` Varka Bhadram
2014-07-14 11:52 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] can: m_can: add device tree binding documentation Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-14 11:52 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-07-15 2:26 ` Dong Aisheng
2014-07-15 2:26 ` Dong Aisheng
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=53C3C97A.7080102@pengutronix.de \
--to=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=b29396@freescale.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
--cc=varkabhadram@gmail.com \
--cc=wg@grandegger.com \
/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.