Re: [PATCH v4 06/10] ARM: dts: am4372: Add DCAN nodes

[Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>]

* Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> [141114 08:24]:
> On 11/13/2014 07:40 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de> [141113 06:55]:
> >> On 11/13/2014 03:49 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >>> On 11/13/2014 04:44 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> >>>> On 11/13/2014 03:40 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >>>>> On 11/13/2014 04:07 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> >>>>>> On 11/13/2014 01:22 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >>>>>>> The SoC contains 2 DCAN modules. Add them.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>  arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>>>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi
> >>>>>>> index 899c57c..12fb1db 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi
> >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi
> >>>>>>> @@ -901,6 +901,28 @@
> >>>>>>>  			compatible = "mmio-sram";
> >>>>>>>  			reg = <0x40300000 0x40000>; /* 256k */
> >>>>>>>  		};
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> +		dcan0: can@481cc000 {
> >>>>>>> +			compatible = "ti,am3352-d_can";
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You should add "ti,am4372-d_can" as first compatible here.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> We don't have a separate compatible id for am4372-d_can
> >>>>> as it the IP exactly same as am3352-d_can.
> >>>>
> >>>> Having the "ti,am4372-d_can" compatible gives you the freedom to add
> >>>> some spacial handling for the IP if there turns that you need to without
> >>>> needing to modify the device tree. (We do this on imx.)
> >>>
> >>> Agreed. On OMAP platforms we don't add new compatible IDs unless we really need to.
> >>> Can we add "ti,am4372-d_can" even if it is not mentioned in Documentation/devicetree/bindings?
> >>>
> >>> Tony what is your preference?
> >>
> >> I don't insist, do it the Omap way :)
> > 
> > I agree it's good to add if we need to add custom handling later on.
> 
> As of now I don't foresee any custom handling for am4372-d_can vs am3352-d_can, but I can
> add am4372-d_can anyways. In that case, do I need to mention it in 
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/c_can.txt?
>
> I guess not, cause we don't do anything specific to am4372-d_can there.

I think you should to avoid checkpatch.pl warnings.

Regards,

Tony