Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

Agreed. And the pins are E18 and E17 for DCAN1_RX/TX on the BBB schematic. These are the pins the TI pinmux tools says use. So, trying to use these two pins for CAN1 because we don’t have the P9 expansion header. That is just the first step in this CAN bring up process for a custom BBB board

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Robert Nelson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: > > The need to use E18 and E19 For CAN1 comes from the TI pinmux tool. > > Umm, on the ZCZ package used on the BBB > > E18: dcan1_tx > E19:

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Robert Nelson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: >> The need to use E18 and E19 For CAN1 comes from the TI pinmux tool. > > Umm, on the ZCZ package used on the BBB > > E18: dcan1_tx > E19:

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: > The need to use E18 and E19 For CAN1 comes from the TI pinmux tool. Umm, on the ZCZ package used on the BBB E18: dcan1_tx E19: not available for can0/can1... Want to try again? Regards, -- Robert Nelson

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Robert Nelson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: > > E17 and E18 we want to use that are designated as possible CAN1 pins on > the > > BeagleBone Black schematic. > > > > Not using a

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

The need to use E18 and E19 For CAN1 comes from the TI pinmux tool. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 1, 2017, at 1:19 PM, Robert Nelson wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: >> E17 and E18 we want to use that are designated

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

The signals are all routed just need to pinmux E18 and E19 which are the same for the BBB. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 1, 2017, at 1:19 PM, Robert Nelson wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: >> E17 and E18 we want to

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

These comments were a reply to Robert,!but threads are getting confused a bit for everyone especially for me. Let me look at this more and see if I can find the pinmux pins I need in i-boot and the kernel. Even if they don’t exist in u-boot, they should in the kernel. Then I can do as Robert

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: > E17 and E18 we want to use that are designated as possible CAN1 pins on the > BeagleBone Black schematic. > > Not using a different overlay, using the existing 4.14 kernel and 2017 I > boot that Robert Nelson suggests

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

E17 and E18 we want to use that are designated as possible CAN1 pins on the BeagleBone Black schematic. Not using a different overlay, using the existing 4.14 kernel and 2017 I boot that Robert Nelson suggests using for the BBB. But we need to pinmux for E17 and E18 because the TI pinmuxing

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Tracy Smith wrote: > Ok look this custom board is based on the BeagleBone Black. For all > intense and purposes it is the BBB. The pins for the AM3358 are the same. > The primary difference is no P9 expansion header. What you are suggesting

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:17 AM, William Hermans wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:12 AM, William Hermans > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Tracy Smith >> wrote: >> >>> We have no P9expansion header. I’ve

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:12 AM, William Hermans wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Tracy Smith > wrote: > >> We have no P9expansion header. I’ve already discussed this with Robert >> Nelson. We are using the AM3358 pins I sent previously.

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Tracy Smith wrote: > We have no P9expansion header. I’ve already discussed this with Robert > Nelson. We are using the AM3358 pins I sent previously. Any can using the > P9and this overlay will not work for our custom board. Ah, i should

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Tracy Smith wrote: > Hi William, > > These overlays from Robert Nelson are associated with the P9 expansion > header. We don’t have a P9 expansion header on the custom BBB we are > using. So we can’t use this overlay. > > Thx, Tracy >

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

We have no P9expansion header. I’ve already discussed this with Robert Nelson. We are using the AM3358 pins I sent previously. Any can using the P9and this overlay will not work for our custom board. Sent from my iPad > On Nov 1, 2017, at 12:03 PM, William Hermans wrote:

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Tracy Smith wrote: > Hi William, > > Thanks for the email and here is what I’m trying to do. > > The CANUSB from Lawicel is a standard USB device that looks like a serial > port since it can use the FTDI driver. > > > > On the MachineKit

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

Hi William, Using the TI pinmux tool it provides two pins associated with CAN1. One for TX and one for RX. I just need to use these two pins for the uboot overlays instead of the I2C P9 extension header supported by the most recent kernel releases. On our custom BBB we don’t have a P9 and

Re: [beagleboard] Re: u-boot support for pins

SO what is it that you're trying to do ? I've read your posts, but am still mystified. Just sayin' . . . I've been working with this hardware for around 5 years now, have written many device tree overlays for various hardware configurations. Including GPIO, I2C, UART, CAN, SPI, etc. I'm willing