Wolfgang

On 10/05/2018 12:56 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:

Hello Dan,

Am 04.10.2018 um 22:26 schrieb Dan Murphy:

quoted

Wolfgang

On 09/26/2018 12:54 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:

quoted

Hello,

I wonder why you do not extend the existing MCAN driver by implementing
an interface to access the hardware. Would that be feasible?

I have created a m_can_core code base that can be used by other hardware that
have special needs.

So I have created the m_can_core, m_can and the tcan4x5x drivers.

Great, I still think it's a good idea to have just one "m_can" driver.

The m_can and tcan4x5x provide the device level implementations.  The m_can_core
deals specifically with handling of the m_can IP and protocol.

quoted

I can RFC the code to see if this is what is expected.
It is not 100% working but it is close enough for a directional call.

That would be nice! Most of the SPI accesses are pure register accesses.
A few read/write more bytes at a time (for data, etc.) but that could be
handled by appropriate interface functions. One general problem is that
SPI accesses are not possible from interrupt context requiring threads
or work queues. Also NAPI is usually not used.

Other opinions?

agreed. Is there any issue with moving the request_irq to a threaded_irq?
Not sure how that would affect the timing.

Wolfgang.

PS: I have added Mario to the CC. Maybe he could test a common driver on
his M_CAN hardware.

I found that our am5/dra76 EVM also uses this IP stack.  So I am working with
our experts there to test and review the code as well.

Dan

-- 
------------------
Dan Murphy