On 08/10/2011 01:35 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 01:27:52PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>> "...and then associate the label with an alias."
>>
>> The alias can then be used if you want "can0" versus "can1".
>
> Does the alias get used by either the kernel or something else or is it
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 01:27:52PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 08/10/2011 01:23 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> > On 08/10/2011 06:00 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 02:36:20PM +, U Bhaskar-B22300 wrote:
> > ...
> >> It looks like the way to do that is to assign a label to
On 08/10/2011 01:23 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> On 08/10/2011 06:00 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 02:36:20PM +, U Bhaskar-B22300 wrote:
> ...
>> It looks like the way to do that is to assign a label to those devices
>> and then associate the label with an alias. I have
On 08/10/2011 06:00 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 02:36:20PM +, U Bhaskar-B22300 wrote:
...
> It looks like the way to do that is to assign a label to those devices
> and then associate the label with an alias. I have no idea how that
> works under the hood, but it is the way
>>> So the node names should be
>>> can@1c000 {
>>> can@1d000 {
>>> correct?
>>>
>> [Bhaskar] As there are two CAN controllers on P1010,So won't it be better
>> to distinguish it by can0 and can1 instead by simple "can" ?
>
, 2011 7:46 PM
> >>>>> To: Wolfgang Grandegger
> >>>>> Cc: Robin Holt; Marc Kleine-Budde; U Bhaskar-B22300; Wood Scott-B07421;
> >>>>> net...@vger.kernel.org; Kumar Gala; socketcan-c...@lists.berlios.de; PPC
> >>>>> list
> >>>
0; Wood Scott-B07421;
>>>>> net...@vger.kernel.org; Kumar Gala; socketcan-c...@lists.berlios.de; PPC
>>>>> list
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree
>>>>> binding.
>>>>>
>>>&g
m: Robin Holt [mailto:h...@sgi.com]
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 7:46 PM
> >>> To: Wolfgang Grandegger
> >>> Cc: Robin Holt; Marc Kleine-Budde; U Bhaskar-B22300; Wood Scott-B07421;
> >>> net...@vger.kernel.org; Kumar Gala; socketcan-c...@lis
t; To: Wolfgang Grandegger
>>> Cc: Robin Holt; Marc Kleine-Budde; U Bhaskar-B22300; Wood Scott-B07421;
>>> net...@vger.kernel.org; Kumar Gala; socketcan-c...@lists.berlios.de; PPC
>>> list
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree
&g
U Bhaskar-B22300; Wood Scott-B07421;
> > net...@vger.kernel.org; Kumar Gala; socketcan-c...@lists.berlios.de; PPC
> > list
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree
> > binding.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Wolfg
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:45:17AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Aug 10, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> >> Hi Robin,
> >>
> >> On 08/10/2011 05:06 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> >>> In working with the socketcan develop
On Aug 10, 2011, at 9:41 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> On 08/10/2011 04:15 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> ...
>> Done, except the
>>> compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan";
>>
>> line is
>> compatible = "
On Aug 10, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>> Hi Robin,
>>
>> On 08/10/2011 05:06 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
>>> the Documentation...fsl-flexcan.txt
On 08/10/2011 04:15 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
...
> Done, except the
>> compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan";
>
> line is
> compatible = "fsl,flexcan", "fsl,flexcan-p1010";
IIRC, there order is more to l
ios.de; PPC
> list
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree
> binding.
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> > Hi Robin,
> >
> > On 08/10/2011 05:06 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> > > I
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> Hi Robin,
>
> On 08/10/2011 05:06 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> > In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
> > the Documentation...fsl-flexcan.txt device tree documentation needs to
> > be cleaned up.
Hi Robin,
On 08/10/2011 05:06 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
> the Documentation...fsl-flexcan.txt device tree documentation needs to
> be cleaned up. The driver does not depend upon any properties other
Your first sentence could
Grant,
Do you need this patch resent with you on the Cc: list or can you pick
up the discussion from here? I am just trying to minimize noise on
the mailing lists if it is not needed.
The essence of the discussion to this point is:
1) Freescale built a board support package for a new processor
Robin,
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 10:06:04PM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
> the Documentation...fsl-flexcan.txt device tree documentation needs to
> be cleaned up. The driver does not depend upon any properties other
> than the r
In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
the Documentation...fsl-flexcan.txt device tree documentation needs to
be cleaned up. The driver does not depend upon any properties other
than the required properties so we are removing the file. Additionally,
the p1010*dts
20 matches
Mail list logo
