Hi,
On 10.9.2018 15:14, Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 7:50 PM Anssi Hannula <anssi.hannula@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Add support for Xilinx CAN FD core.
>>
>> The major difference from the previously supported cores is that there
>> are TX mailboxes instead of a TX FIFO and the RX FIFO access method is
>> different.
>>
>> We only transmit one frame at a time to prevent the HW from reordering
>> frames (it uses CAN ID priority order).
>>
>> Support for CAN FD protocol is not added yet.
>>
>> v2: Removed unnecessary "rx-mode" DT property and wrapped some long
>> lines.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anssi Hannula <anssi.hannula@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/can/xilinx_can.c | 303 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 259 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
[...]
>>
>> +static const struct can_bittiming_const xcan_bittiming_const_canfd = {
>> + .name = DRIVER_NAME,
>> + .tseg1_min = 1,
>> + .tseg1_max = 64,
>> + .tseg2_min = 1,
>> + .tseg2_max = 16,
>> + .sjw_max = 16,
>> + .brp_min = 1,
>> + .brp_max = 256,
>> + .brp_inc = 1,
>> +};
> Where is this used?
[...]
>
>> +
>> +static const struct xcan_devtype_data xcan_canfd_data = {
>> + .flags = XCAN_FLAG_EXT_FILTERS |
>> + XCAN_FLAG_RXMNF |
>> + XCAN_FLAG_TX_MAILBOXES |
>> + XCAN_FLAG_RX_FIFO_MULTI,
>> + .bittiming_const = &xcan_bittiming_const,
> Did you intend to use xcan_bittiming_const_canfd here ?
>
Yes, good catch. I'll test on HW and then post a patch, or you can do so
if you have one ready already.
--
Anssi Hannula / Bitwise Oy
+358 503803997
