From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: LW@KARO-electronics.de (=?utf-8?Q?Lothar_Wa=C3=9Fmann?=)
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:07:57 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] net: flexcan: add transceiver switch gpios support
In-Reply-To: <20120628114108.GD22990@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
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>
 <20120628114108.GD22990@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
Message-ID: <20460.18717.17688.965250@ipc1.ka-ro>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi,

Shawn Guo writes:
> 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.
> 
A transceiver is just a dumb piece of hardware, while a PHY contains
some intelligence of its own.


Lothar Wa?mann
-- 
___________________________________________________________

Ka-Ro electronics GmbH | Pascalstra?e 22 | D - 52076 Aachen
Phone: +49 2408 1402-0 | Fax: +49 2408 1402-10
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Matthias Kaussen
Handelsregistereintrag: Amtsgericht Aachen, HRB 4996

www.karo-electronics.de | info at karo-electronics.de
___________________________________________________________