On 10/18/2011 06:43 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
>>> Robin,
>>>
>>> Do you remember why we went with just 'fsl,p1010-flexcan' as the device
>>> tree compatible? Do we feel the flex can on P1010 isn't the same as on
>>> MPC5xxx? or the ARM SoCs?
>>
>> The decision was due to the fact there is no true
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 06:43:13AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> >> Robin,
> >>
> >> Do you remember why we went with just 'fsl,p1010-flexcan' as the device
> >> tree compatible? Do we feel the flex can on P1010 isn't the same as on
> >> MPC5xxx? or the ARM SoCs?
> >
> > The decision was due t
On 10/18/2011 01:43 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> Thanks, I'll look into this internally at FSL. I think its confusing
> as hell to have "fsl,p1010-flexcan" in an ARM .dts and don't think
> any reasonable ARM customer of FSL would know to put a PPC SOC name
> in their .dts. I'll ask the HW guys what's
>> Robin,
>>
>> Do you remember why we went with just 'fsl,p1010-flexcan' as the device tree
>> compatible? Do we feel the flex can on P1010 isn't the same as on MPC5xxx?
>> or the ARM SoCs?
>
> The decision was due to the fact there is no true "generic" fsl.flexcan
> chip free of any SOC imp
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:44:07AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Aug 16, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>
> > David,
> >
> > The following set of patches have been reviewed by the above parties and
> > all comments have been integrated. Although the patches stray from the
> > drivers/ne
Hi Kumar,
On 10/18/2011 07:44 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Aug 16, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> The following set of patches have been reviewed by the above parties and
>> all comments have been integrated. Although the patches stray from the
>> drivers/net/can directo
On Aug 16, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> David,
>
> The following set of patches have been reviewed by the above parties and
> all comments have been integrated. Although the patches stray from the
> drivers/net/can directory, the diversions are related to changes for
> the flexcan dri
From: Robin Holt
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 22:32:18 -0500
> The following set of patches have been reviewed by the above parties and
> all comments have been integrated. Although the patches stray from the
> drivers/net/can directory, the diversions are related to changes for
> the flexcan driver.
David,
The following set of patches have been reviewed by the above parties and
all comments have been integrated. Although the patches stray from the
drivers/net/can directory, the diversions are related to changes for
the flexcan driver.
The patch set is based upon your net-next-2.6 tree's com
