On 14.03.2023 21:01:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 14/03/2023 16:11, Markus Schneider-Pargmann wrote: > > These two new chips do not have state or wake pins. > > > > Signed-off-by: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../devicetree/bindings/net/can/tcan4x5x.txt | 11 ++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/tcan4x5x.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/tcan4x5x.txt > > index e3501bfa22e9..38a2b5369b44 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/tcan4x5x.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/tcan4x5x.txt > > @@ -4,7 +4,10 @@ Texas Instruments TCAN4x5x CAN Controller > > This file provides device node information for the TCAN4x5x interface contains. > > > > Required properties: > > - - compatible: "ti,tcan4x5x" > > + - compatible: > > + "ti,tcan4x5x" or > > + "ti,tcan4552" or > > + "ti,tcan4553" > > Awesome, they nicely fit into wildcard... Would be useful to deprecate > the wildcard at some point and switch to proper compatibles in such > case, because now they became confusing. I plead for DT stability! As I understand correctly, the exact version of the chip (4550, 4552, or 4553) can be detected via the ID2 register. regards, Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
