From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Grandegger Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] can: c_can: Provide generic interface to configure c-can message objects Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:20:53 +0100 Message-ID: <50D302A5.30706@grandegger.com> References: <50D2E7DE.5030808@grandegger.com> <50D2EE10.6090208@st.com> <50D2F29E.6010703@grandegger.com> <50D2F3F0.7040509@st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ngcobalt02.manitu.net ([217.11.48.102]:40028 "EHLO ngcobalt02.manitu.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751359Ab2LTMU5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:20:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <50D2F3F0.7040509@st.com> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Amit Virdi Cc: Bhupesh SHARMA , "linux-can@vger.kernel.org" , "mkl@pengutronix.de" , "anilkumar@ti.com" , spear-devel On 12/20/2012 12:18 PM, Amit Virdi wrote: > On 12/20/2012 4:42 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >>> I believe this is a good feature to keep, otherwise we always have >>> the default option of >>> > having equal msg objects for Tx and Rx purposes (16 each). >> We need to improve the RX handling anyway similar to Marc's at91_can >> driver. There 24 objects are used for RX and 8 for TX. > > Ok but maybe for the time being we can go ahead with this > implementation. When Marc's helper library is ready, we can send patches > over the current implementation to adapt to it. This TX handing improvement does not block this patch. The question is also if the device-tree is the right place for such variables. If they should be configurable by the user, the device-tree is too static (apart from the fact that it's not a hardware property). A normal user cannot change the device-tree. Wolfgang.