From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <4E419180.3090507@freescale.com> Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 14:58:56 -0500 From: Scott Wood MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wolfgang Grandegger Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding. References: <1312901031-29887-1-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com> <1312901031-29887-6-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com> <4E4179CB.6030101@freescale.com> <20110809184524.GB4926@sgi.com> <4E4186BD.5000602@freescale.com> <4E418F2D.4060504@grandegger.com> In-Reply-To: <4E418F2D.4060504@grandegger.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , U Bhaskar-B22300 , socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de, Robin Holt , PPC list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 08/09/2011 02:49 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > Yes. The doc for the bindings we speak about > > http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt > > sneaked into the kernel without been presented on any mailing list and > without the corresponding driver patch. It was posted on linuxppc-dev: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/91980/ Though I agree it should have been posted more widely. > OK, just > > "fsl,p1010-flexcan" > > or > > "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan" I'm ok with the latter, if there's enough in common that it's conceivable that a driver wouldn't care. The more specific compatible will be there if the driver wants to make use of it later. -Scot