From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vaibhav Hiremath Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm/dts: AM33XX: Add D_CAN device tree data Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 11:58:41 +0530 Message-ID: <501B6F99.4020506@ti.com> References: <1343219012-19472-1-git-send-email-anilkumar@ti.com> <1343219012-19472-2-git-send-email-anilkumar@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1343219012-19472-2-git-send-email-anilkumar@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: AnilKumar Ch Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, mkl@pengutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 7/25/2012 5:53 PM, AnilKumar Ch wrote: > Add Bosch D_CAN controller device tree data to AM33XX dtsi file > by adding d_can device node with all the necessary parameters. > > Signed-off-by: AnilKumar Ch > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/am33xx.dtsi | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am33xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am33xx.dtsi > index 9b974dc..2db2ffb 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am33xx.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am33xx.dtsi > @@ -163,5 +163,10 @@ > #size-cells = <0>; > ti,hwmods = "i2c3"; > }; > + > + dcan1: d_can@481D0000 { > + compatible = "bosch,d_can"; > + ti,hwmods = "d_can1"; > + }; Anil, Any reason why we are only specifying dcan1 instance? Shouldn't we specify dcan0 as well here? Thanks, Vaibhav > }; > }; >