From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/10] ARM: dts: am4372: Add DCAN nodes Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 10:07:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20141114180746.GV31250@atomide.com> References: <1415881371-4982-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <1415881371-4982-7-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <5464BB38.7020402@pengutronix.de> <5464C2C4.2070907@ti.com> <5464C3B1.2030908@pengutronix.de> <5464C4E8.9060103@ti.com> <5464C609.9070800@pengutronix.de> <20141113174044.GN26481@atomide.com> <54662C3D.8050103@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54662C3D.8050103@ti.com> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Roger Quadros Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde , wg@grandegger.com, wsa@the-dreams.de, mugunthanvnm@ti.com, george.cherian@ti.com, balbi@ti.com, nsekhar@ti.comnm@ti.com, sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org * Roger Quadros [141114 08:24]: > On 11/13/2014 07:40 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Marc Kleine-Budde [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 > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> 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