From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: shawn.guo@linaro.org (Shawn Guo)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 19:41:10 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] net: flexcan: add transceiver switch gpios support
In-Reply-To: <4FEC400F.8010506@pengutronix.de>
References: <1340853701-4488-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org>
 <1340853701-4488-3-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org>
 <4FEC329C.7070004@pengutronix.de>
 <20120628112111.GC22990@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
 <4FEC400F.8010506@pengutronix.de>
Message-ID: <20120628114108.GD22990@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 01:29:19PM +0200, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> I mean which name is more precise, do these gpio enable/standy a "phy"
> or a "transceiver". For example:
> http://www.nxp.com/documents/application_note/AN00094.pdf, this document
> says: TJA1041/1041A high speed CAN transceiver.
> 
Isn't term "phy" (physical interface) generally meant to be the same
thing as "transceiver"?  I just happened to like the shorter one as
what Hui did in his patch.

But it does not really matter to me, will change the name since you
care about it.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn