On 1/23/20 12:46 PM, Faiz Abbas wrote: > Marc, > > On 23/01/20 4:47 pm, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: >> On 1/22/20 9:03 AM, Faiz Abbas wrote: >>> This series adds driver patches to support MCAN in TI's AM654x-idk. >>> >>> Faiz Abbas (3): >>> dt-bindings: net: can: m_can: Add Documentation for stb-gpios >>> can: m_can: m_can_platform: Add support for enabling transceiver >>> through the STB line >>> arm64: defconfig: Add Support for Bosch M_CAN controllers >>> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt | 2 ++ >>> arch/arm64/configs/defconfig | 3 +++ >>> drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can_platform.c | 12 ++++++++++++ >>> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+) >> >> What about adding support for xceiver-supply as done in several other >> drivers (ti_hecc.c, flexcan.c, mcp251x.c)? And using this for the stb line? > > Looks like you had given this feedback a long time ago and I forgot > about it. Sorry about that :-) > > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1006238/ > > But now that I think about it, its kinda weird that we are modelling > part of the transceiver as a separate child node > (Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/can-transceiver.txt) and the > other parts as a regulator. We need a regulator, as there are dual phy chips with a single enable line. > Anyone looking at the transceiver node would figure thats where the > enable gpio/regulator node needs to go instead of the parent node. > Shouldn't we have all transceiver properties under the same node? Feel free to add support for the regulator to the transceiver node and convert the existing drivers to accept both bindings. Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
