On 9/23/20 10:02 AM, Michael Walle wrote:
[...]

>> The compatible of your can device matches the one listed in
>> the driver. So there's no need for the "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan"
>> in the driver.
>>
>> If it turns out, that the "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan" needs
>> different handling than the "fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan", we would
>> add it with different quirks to the driver.
> 
> That was what I was asking. Ie. if Joakim already knows any and
> if it makes sense to have some added right now.

ACK, I don't know of any difference.

> And maybe you/he want to see the LS1028A added to the table in
> the header of the file. I've had a look at the vendor manual but
> couldn't even find the IP version. Seems to me that only Joakim
> is able to fill out that row ;)

Right, the more IP cores in the table are appreciated. I don't think the IP core
version used in the SoCs is available to the public. Joakim, feel free to add a
line for the ls1028ar1 and the imx8mp.

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Vertretung West/Dortmund         | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |