From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EABB4C44503 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 15:31:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Message-ID:Date:Mime-Version:Subject:Cc :To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: List-Owner; bh=CAT/CZUchRxPI7YZgvktfwKQQ2Dxf/n8HGk/oiNjThI=; b=4qxxahM5NFxpTn 2NTN1Fd3YC2QnjOaXO1fSlt8AHUdSW5WALz8EwDbXq2QdxQYbqTF2LbAuFSlNHedH2bjyAPF/Ps2Y UGrQn0De1p4YbDo6F01tkESnY7qnDcA5sQ2KEhSLSd2xtE14wdyYwZVnEW4iONN7Cw5Hrp0CIL+hM xL3bMvSwUJnNBesb6si3HDpYyMeM4tHBMkE9HqC4VzUruhTbnRR+BsAw1qoUoLnCv1QGGpDfZ4Zd3 zJ3WqS7lUbcmLYymGYmdFitgPkagZRbFmO2AMmpTbqylSOhUs4GwMkSEi8MYgzVz2prw+kLKNpk4E gpLuaiJZ7cF8O7SAOaGw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wh7lx-0000000FJM9-3qLY; Tue, 07 Jul 2026 15:31:45 +0000 Received: from out203-205-221-210.mail.qq.com ([203.205.221.210]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wfCc5-00000003pZT-1m1a; Thu, 02 Jul 2026 08:17:39 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qq.com; s=s201512; t=1782980247; bh=1B5GSyAJIOG4wfRq0mDuvB3G4ilaYLoysw4eWFLduAs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date; b=cpd2NHg1cpKsDzPB67xLogddoX0ZexDC8qnbgdxJEwhGKQ1qR7hMp2oJ2oKX2sa26 tt2XXkk+1D674l/Q0O3epxFPonHVpGqdVZ75BwOhvuA7gcTCPu1ttWYBvJEQ3xuARA hCbWyEt6uyUAO5OctzMpT6nUUp9ij3qUQSn0tF4s= X-QQ-XMRINFO: MSVp+SPm3vtSI1QTLgDHQqIV1w2oNKDqfg== X-QQ-XMAILINFO: M/7aYRxQgGxsDc7Ynwti5r/VjLIh7JToZmaGq7z/9Lpn+xoTtnMY+ObYS5q7v3 8tGSzg+S/2qII7mL9LKOta4NXyXzmq00jDmWAGEBwcFcXOu2vEZiQCYYFn5QRLh4zSF87Gpd3lH+c VbRSN7jq4nJMSt0o8AxY80ZbfcgAdWYxm/BEhJObUXUhq/opU0rhMEXxuZFUMdITWda4qneGtswU0 6/600Oum+0LTImHQbWjz07VvKDwjuGzg90NC3nmMUcawyRZ9iTZlMb3GMsbFvWQvxFcHlAxW9rdVL R8zDRCsYpb4veRyIh/x0KaVAfLcXGvPgKqHoX+WzCEyDK3L0gPY9EOtiF3tVDQ33cxrnGbpb48ybU ShfTiKqv583HgYrYz39xKvQX9T8oUhbVdwyRHDEoNM+PEIxPWaS4PfuBCspWyFSpt7Fe9k3QY6mrE /6JS/xTS55iW6vC0CFarU2zIX/QBqyxZoK2W4vaeQENwTit4l/I0Ll7e5ijCiQAjX2uNojQtqisg4 ngTrzq9Ym8GvP1s/hSM85bSsmsDhq7hMZwOahFxr32T0kMnNk24UgxfhhpDZxcn/7YGn4Z3AiYYnW 1ZA/jClQKpcqfzIOCWVaYDUBTY2A1bTQNL+DiKW+h1Qbeqmika+roigtEdjdLnDD1puyIkNIffvzi bLTj6QLnt7PakN55+kYWbUfmSTlxiVoYgH5dX9UYbZ6TY5+4cN8rWj1xstYHMHXAwxxZWorfFl/0M 2RTOmiTr6Us2sTTruEhxJ2+sv1cxN5kTRBz1UsiXGeGH/3nTTAnX1to6TTviEDWgmKGYwXT7sFVEf HtJgatzh1T3rnVViBYB8+ko954blgfJJ2Ztgm7/QwuPBO1e6xtuRZadWAvCNwMY+dVP9UJKYJ2HQ+ tSPZEMz4xdwc14WqoMaNwoDb4LMX3S/dRVnB0gmWLI4Cf/PJAo5uRd4hi9yliO/GHhwFdXTQ6FNIG 1IkdX2JAiQCi/ZbB9hUUTiCLEViEXhWjWJIgw7x+o9DMWgoqMyXyDe0SULRF5ccANJSMzNvIgK7zK FfrtrGWutjheKsws6DxLyMvYq4/HthrgeVteV From: "=?utf-8?B?Q3VuaGFvIEx1?=" <1579567540@qq.com> To: "=?utf-8?B?a3J6aw==?=" Cc: "=?utf-8?B?TWFyYyBLbGVpbmUtQnVkZGU=?=" , "=?utf-8?B?aGVpa28=?=" , "=?utf-8?B?bGludXgtY2Fu?=" , "=?utf-8?B?bWFpbGhvbA==?=" , "=?utf-8?B?a2VybmVs?=" , "=?utf-8?B?cm9iaA==?=" , "=?utf-8?B?a3J6aytkdA==?=" , "=?utf-8?B?Y29ub3IrZHQ=?=" , "=?utf-8?B?ZGV2aWNldHJlZQ==?=" , "=?utf-8?B?bGludXgtYXJtLWtlcm5lbA==?=" , "=?utf-8?B?bGludXgtcm9ja2NoaXA=?=" , "=?utf-8?B?bGludXgta2VybmVs?=" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: can: rockchip: add rk3588v2 CAN-FD compatible Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 16:17:25 +0800 X-Priority: 3 Message-ID: X-QQ-MIME: TCMime 1.0 by Tencent X-Mailer: QQMail 2.x X-QQ-Mailer: QQMail 2.x X-QQ-mid: xmsezb41-0t1782980245tkalsowho X-Bad-Reply: 'Re:' in Subject but no References or In-Reply-To headers X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260702_011738_122594_FFD55E81 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 16.37 ) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 07 Jul 2026 08:29:51 -0700 X-BeenThere: linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Upstream kernel work for Rockchip platforms List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "Linux-rockchip" Errors-To: linux-rockchip-bounces+linux-rockchip=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Krzysztof, thanks for the review. > DT properties have nothing to do here. Are you saying it is fully > compatible? Then express it properly with fallback. No, I do not think RK3588v2 is fully compatible with RK3568v2. The RX FIFO count field uses a different bitfield on RK3588v2, so using rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd as a fallback would describe a register layout that does not match the hardware. Both standard and extended CAN-FD frames worked in my local RK3588v2 testing, but that only confirms CAN-FD functionality on this variant. It does not make the RK3568v2 register layout a valid fallback for RK3588v2. I will reword the commit message in v2 to explain this hardware difference instead of talking about the DT properties. > Do not explain what you did. Explain WHY. > > Driver is irrelevant here. Understood. I will remove the driver-focused wording from the binding patch. The v2 commit message will explain why RK3588v2 needs its own compatible from the hardware description point of view. > We do not take anonymous contributions. I will use my real name in v2. > So that's just enum with previous entry I will fold the single-compatible entries into an enum in v2. > And why is this different from rk3588? The reason I used rk3588v2 is that this is how the controller identifies itself at runtime: rockchip_canfd fea60000.can can0: Rockchip-CANFD rk3588v2 rev2.2 (errata 0x0000) found rockchip_canfd fea70000.can can1: Rockchip-CANFD rk3588v2 rev2.2 (errata 0x0000) found I also checked Rockchip's vendor kernel 6.1 sources. The RK3588 DTS uses the binding name "rockchip,can-2.0" for these controllers, while the upstream driver has SoC-specific compatibles for the Rockchip CAN-FD IP. That is why I chose the SoC/IP variant name rockchip,rk3588v2-canfd. If the preferred binding name is rockchip,rk3588-canfd instead, I can change the compatible in v2. Thanks, Cunhao Lu _______________________________________________ Linux-rockchip mailing list Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip