Am 2020-02-14 10:18, schrieb Joakim Zhang:
Best Regards, Joakim Zhang-----Original Message----- From: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> Sent: 2020年2月14日 16:43 To: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@xxxxxxx> Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-can@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@xxxxxxx>Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] can: flexcan: add CAN FD support for NXP FlexcanHi Joakim, Am 2020-02-14 02:55, schrieb Joakim Zhang: > Hi Michal, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> >> Sent: 2020年2月14日 3:20 >> To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@xxxxxxx>; wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; >> netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-can@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Pankaj Bansal >> <pankaj.bansal@xxxxxxx>; Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] can: flexcan: add CAN FD support for NXP >> Flexcan >> >> Hi, >> >> >>> Are you prepared to add back these patches as they are necessary >> >>> for Flexcan CAN FD? And this Flexcan CAN FD patch set is based on >> >>> these patches. >> >> >> >> Yes, these patches will be added back. >> > >> >I've cleaned up the first patch a bit, and pushed everything to the >> >testing branch. Can you give it a test. >> >> What happend to that branch? FWIW I've just tried the patches on a >> custom board with a LS1028A SoC. Both CAN and CAN-FD are working. >> I've tested against a Peaktech USB CAN adapter. I'd love to see these >> patches upstream, because our board also offers CAN and basic support >> for it just made it upstream [1]. > The FlexCAN CAN FD related patches have stayed in > linux-can-next/flexcan branch for a long time, I still don't know why > Marc doesn't merge them into Linux mainline. > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit. > kernel.org%2Fpub%2Fscm%2Flinux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Fmkl%2Flinux-can-next.g > it%2Ftree%2F%3Fh%3Dflexcan&data=02%7C01%7Cqiangqing.zhang%40n xp.co > m%7C94dca4472a584410b3b908d7b129db27%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c 5c30163 > 5%7C0%7C0%7C637172665642079192&sdata=77tG6VuQCi%2FZXBKb23 8%2FdNSV3 > NUIFrM5Y0e9yj0J3os%3D&reserved=0 > Also must hope that this patch set can be upstreamed soon. :-)I've took them from this branch and applied them to the latest linux master.Thus, Tested-by: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> >> If these patches are upstream, only the device tree nodes seems to be >> missing. >> I don't know what has happened to [2]. But the patch doesn't seem to >> be necessary. > Yes, this patch is unnecessary. I have NACKed this patch for that, > according to FlexCAN Integrated Guide, CTRL1[CLKSRC]=0 select > oscillator clock and CTRL1[CLKSRC]=1 select peripheral clock. > But it is actually decided by SoC integration, for i.MX, the design is > different. ok thanks for clarifying. > I have not upstream i.MX FlexCAN device tree nodes, since it's > dependency have not upstreamed yet. > >> Pankaj already send a patch to add the device node to the LS1028A [3]. >> Thats basically the same I've used, only that mine didn't had the >> "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan" compatiblity string, but only the >> "lx2160ar1-flexcan" >> which is the correct way to use it, right? > You can see below table from FlexCAN driver, "fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan" > supports CAN FD, you can use this compatible string.correct. I've already a patch that does exactly this ;) Who would take the patch for adding the LS1028A can device tree nodes to ls1028a.dtsi? You or ShawnGuo?Sorry, I missed the link[3], we usually write it this way: compatible = "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan","fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan"; Please send patch to Shawn Guo, he will review the device tree.
As far as I know, there should be no undocumented binding. Eg. the ls1028ar1-flexcan is neither in the source nor in the device tree binding documentation, thus wouldn't
be accepted.Thus either there should be another ls1028ar1-flexcan in the flexcan_of_match table and the node should only contain that string or the node should only contain
fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan. Is there any advantage of the first option? -michael
> static const struct of_device_id flexcan_of_match[] = { > { .compatible = "fsl,imx8qm-flexcan", .data = > &fsl_imx8qm_devtype_data, }, > { .compatible = "fsl,imx6q-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx6q_devtype_data, > }, > { .compatible = "fsl,imx28-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx28_devtype_data, > }, > { .compatible = "fsl,imx53-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx25_devtype_data, > }, > { .compatible = "fsl,imx35-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx25_devtype_data, > }, > { .compatible = "fsl,imx25-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx25_devtype_data, > }, > { .compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan", .data = &fsl_p1010_devtype_data, > }, > { .compatible = "fsl,vf610-flexcan", .data = &fsl_vf610_devtype_data, > }, > { .compatible = "fsl,ls1021ar2-flexcan", .data = > &fsl_ls1021a_r2_devtype_data, }, > { .compatible = "fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan", .data = > &fsl_lx2160a_r1_devtype_data, }, > { /* sentinel */ }, > }; > -michael
