On 08/04/2011 01:42 PM, Robin Holt wrote: > On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 10:09:55AM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Hi Robin, >> >> On 08/04/2011 05:23 AM, Robin Holt wrote: >>> I have spent some more time working on this. I took their code from the >>> April BSP and am reworking it to be a much cleaner (IMHO) implementation. >>> Hopefully I will have a set of patches for you tomorrow. >>> >>> Right now, I am down to the point of getting the _probe function >>> abstracted off. I think I will get it fairly clean when I am completed. >> >> Not sure what are you trying to do? What is missing in the mainline >> Flexcan driver are the device tree bindings. Unfortunately, Freescale's >> driver is not a good approach. I think it can be done much simpler, >> especially with the new device-tree integration available in v3.0. >> Robin, you have the mainline kernel running for a P1010 board, right? > > I think I just ran into a snag which indicates what your are saying. > > Marc's set of patches above are implemented using struct of_device which > appears to have been removed from mainline powerpc and replaced entirely > with platform_device. That is probably what he meant when he talked > about bit-rot.
In my git tree, I just ripped the fsl driver apart and ported it as-is to top of tree. No compile time testing so far. It did this to find any bugs fsl has introduced into their driver. > How do I go about doing the "new device-tree" integration? I am not > familiar with that at all. /me to :) Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Socketcan-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
