On 11/13/2014 04:44 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 11/13/2014 03:40 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> On 11/13/2014 04:07 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2014 01:22 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>> The SoC contains 2 DCAN modules. Add them.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi
>>>> index 899c57c..12fb1db 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am4372.dtsi
>>>> @@ -901,6 +901,28 @@
>>>> compatible = "mmio-sram";
>>>> reg = <0x40300000 0x40000>; /* 256k */
>>>> };
>>>> +
>>>> + dcan0: can@481cc000 {
>>>> + compatible = "ti,am3352-d_can";
>>>
>>> You should add "ti,am4372-d_can" as first compatible here.
>>>
>> We don't have a separate compatible id for am4372-d_can
>> as it the IP exactly same as am3352-d_can.
>
> Having the "ti,am4372-d_can" compatible gives you the freedom to add
> some spacial handling for the IP if there turns that you need to without
> needing to modify the device tree. (We do this on imx.)
Agreed. On OMAP platforms we don't add new compatible IDs unless we really need to.
Can we add "ti,am4372-d_can" even if it is not mentioned in Documentation/devicetree/bindings?
Tony what is your preference?
cheers,
-roger
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
