On 9/23/20 10:02 AM, Michael Walle wrote: [...] >> The compatible of your can device matches the one listed in >> the driver. So there's no need for the "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan" >> in the driver. >> >> If it turns out, that the "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan" needs >> different handling than the "fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan", we would >> add it with different quirks to the driver. > > That was what I was asking. Ie. if Joakim already knows any and > if it makes sense to have some added right now. ACK, I don't know of any difference. > And maybe you/he want to see the LS1028A added to the table in > the header of the file. I've had a look at the vendor manual but > couldn't even find the IP version. Seems to me that only Joakim > is able to fill out that row ;) Right, the more IP cores in the table are appreciated. I don't think the IP core version used in the SoCs is available to the public. Joakim, feel free to add a line for the ls1028ar1 and the imx8mp. regards, 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
