Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: m_can: Add Documentation for transceiver regulator

Hi Marc,

On 02/03/20 1:46 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:

Marc,

On 26/02/20 2:40 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:

quoted

Hi Marc,

On 21/02/20 2:01 pm, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:

quoted

On 2/21/20 9:31 AM, Faiz Abbas wrote:

quoted

Hi Rob,

On 20/02/20 2:05 am, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 07:58:34PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote:

quoted

Some CAN transceivers have a standby line that needs to be asserted
before they can be used. Model this GPIO lines as an optional
fixed-regulator node. Document bindings for the same.

Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <redacted>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

This has moved to DT schema in my tree, so please adjust it and resend.

Ok.

quoted

quoted

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt
index ed614383af9c..f17e2a5207dc 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt

@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ Optional Subnode:
 			  that can be used for CAN/CAN-FD modes. See
 			  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/can-transceiver.txt
 			  for details.
+
+- xceiver-supply: Regulator that powers the CAN transceiver.

The supply for a transceiver should go in the transceiver node.

Marc, while I have you here, do you agree with this?

I'll look into the details later today.

Sure. Be sure to take another look at my attempt to use the transceiver
with a phy driver some time ago.

https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1006238/

Do you have any comments?

Gentle ping.

Thanks,
Faiz

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel