From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Kleine-Budde Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] can: m_can: add Bosch M_CAN controller support Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 09:12:49 +0200 Message-ID: <53B50271.8070307@pengutronix.de> References: <1403863246-18822-1-git-send-email-b29396@freescale.com> <1403863246-18822-2-git-send-email-b29396@freescale.com> <53ADB1E8.1030504@hartkopp.net> <20140630082622.GB25689@shlinux1.ap.freescale.net> <53B4473B.2050003@hartkopp.net> <53B459C3.6070807@pengutronix.de> <20140703034839.GA20450@shlinux1.ap.freescale.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jF3lwkNfAIJjBP7UcuBdXp478etr3MRfS" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140703034839.GA20450@shlinux1.ap.freescale.net> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dong Aisheng Cc: Oliver Hartkopp , linux-can@vger.kernel.org, wg@grandegger.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --jF3lwkNfAIJjBP7UcuBdXp478etr3MRfS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 07/03/2014 05:48 AM, Dong Aisheng wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 09:13:07PM +0200, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: >> On 07/02/2014 07:54 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: >>> I'm not really familiar with the naming concept in device trees. >>> >>> What is your opinion about the remarks below? >> >> The entries in the DT, at least on freescale baords, follow the naming= >> scheme of the reference manual. E.g. on the mx25 it's can1 and can2: >> >> can1: can@43f88000 { ... } >> can2: can@43f8c000 { ... } >> >> And on the mx28, its: >> >> can0: can@80032000 { ... } >> can1: can@80034000 { ... } >> >> Because the imx25 datasheet uses a "1" based counting scheme, while th= e >> imx28 uses a "0" based one. >> >> So it's best practise to follow the naming and numbering scheme of the= >> hardware reference manual.....and if you have access to the >> documentation of the m_can core, use clock names of the m_can core for= >> the clock-names property. >> >=20 > Based on my knowledge, device tree allows define phandle name according= to > the real device name of HW according spec while the device node name sh= ould > be general(e.g can@80032000 rather than flexcan@80032000). > For imx6sx, there are already following entries in > arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sx.dtsi > flexcan1: can@02090000 {...} > flexcan2: can@02094000 {...} > So i'd prefer to define as: > m_can1: canfd@020e8000 {...} > m_can2: canfd@020f0000 {...} >=20 >=20 > One problem is there're can alias already. > aliases { > can0 =3D &flexcan1; > can1 =3D &flexcan2; > ... > } > I'm not sure adding can2&can3 for mcan is properly: > aliases { > can0 =3D &flexcan1; > can1 =3D &flexcan2; > can2 =3D &m_can1; > can3 =3D &m_can2; > ... > } > Since the m_can driver does not need to use aliases, > so i will not add them. IMHO It's fine too add the can{2,3} aliases to m_can, too. Marc --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de | --jF3lwkNfAIJjBP7UcuBdXp478etr3MRfS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlO1AnEACgkQjTAFq1RaXHOF8QCfVAY+N/IkeYhtbqn2ABLXD7lC NM4An3PO6AN8pUjs0+efjueXiDzCU0tl =T9WT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jF3lwkNfAIJjBP7UcuBdXp478etr3MRfS--