On 08/15/2011 05:03 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> Earlier, you had asked for a more specific name for the compatible
> property of the Freescale flexcan device.  I still have not gotten a
> more specific answer.  Hopefully Marc can give you more details about
> the flexcan implementations.

There are at least 2 versions of the flexcan ip core in the wild. Due to
lack of version numbers or other names I call them old and new here :).

The newer one supports rx fifo mode, whereas the older one doesn't. The
mainline flexcan driver just supports the new core [1]. The older core
is found on coldfire processors. I don't know if there are coldfire cpus
with the new flexcan core, too. The driver can be adopted to the old
core if needed.

The first cpus with the new core I got in touch with was the mx35
(arm11) and mx25 (arm9) both at the same time. Ask fsl which one was
released first. After this there was mx28 (arm9) and there should be an
mx53 (coretexa8) with flexcan too.

> Other than an agreement on the compatible property, I believe we have
> agreement on all the other code changes in these patches.  Is this change
> acceptable as is and if we get a better resolution on the fsl,flexcan
> name later, we can update the documentation and driver then?

cheers, Marc

[1] http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v3.0.1/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c#L871

-- 
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   |