From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de> Date: 2021-01-04 08:47:35
On 1/1/21 6:06 PM, Biju Das wrote:
quoted
The rcar_can driver supports R-Car Gen{1,2,3} and RZ/G{1,2} SoC's, update
the description to reflect this.
Not sure we need to make it generic like dropping {1,2,3}/{1,2} and instead
use R-Car and RZ/G SoC's??
Sounds good. Better make the description more generic instead of updating it
each time a new SoC comes along.
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 |
Hi Prabhakar,
On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 5:00 PM Lad Prabhakar
[off-list ref] wrote:
The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the
description to reflect this.
Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
@@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCARbecalledrcar_can.configCAN_RCAR_CANFD-tristate"Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller"+tristate"Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller"depends onARCH_RENESAS||ARM
Not introduced by this patch, but the "|| ARM" looks strange to me.
Is this meant for compile-testing? Doesn't the driver compile on all
platforms (it does on m68k), so "|| COMPILE_TEST" is not appropriate?
Is the CAN FD controller present on some Renesas arm32 SoCs (but
not yet supported by this driver)?
help
Say Y here if you want to use CAN FD controller found on
- Renesas R-Car SoCs. The driver puts the controller in CAN FD only
- mode, which can interoperate with CAN2.0 nodes but does not support
- dedicated CAN 2.0 mode.
+ Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoCs. The driver puts the
+ controller in CAN FD only mode, which can interoperate with
+ CAN2.0 nodes but does not support dedicated CAN 2.0 mode.
To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will
be called rcar_canfd.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Hi Geert,
Thank you for the review.
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:51 AM Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Prabhakar,
On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 5:00 PM Lad Prabhakar
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the
description to reflect this.
Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
@@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCARbecalledrcar_can.configCAN_RCAR_CANFD-tristate"Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller"+tristate"Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller"depends onARCH_RENESAS||ARM
Not introduced by this patch, but the "|| ARM" looks strange to me.
Is this meant for compile-testing? Doesn't the driver compile on all
platforms (it does on m68k), so "|| COMPILE_TEST" is not appropriate?
Is the CAN FD controller present on some Renesas arm32 SoCs (but
not yet supported by this driver)?
Good catch. "|| ARM" was probably copied from CAN_RCAR config and I
can confirm CAN-FD controller doesn't exist on R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G2
32bit SoC's (but with a bit of google search RZ/A2M supports CAN-FD I
am not sure if its the same controller tough), but said that there
shouldn't be any harm in replacing "|| ARM" with "|| COMPILE_TEST"
for both CAN_RCAR_CAN{FD}. What are your thoughts?
Cheers,
Prabhakar
quoted
help
Say Y here if you want to use CAN FD controller found on
- Renesas R-Car SoCs. The driver puts the controller in CAN FD only
- mode, which can interoperate with CAN2.0 nodes but does not support
- dedicated CAN 2.0 mode.
+ Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoCs. The driver puts the
+ controller in CAN FD only mode, which can interoperate with
+ CAN2.0 nodes but does not support dedicated CAN 2.0 mode.
To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will
be called rcar_canfd.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Hi Prabhakar,
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 2:38 PM Lad, Prabhakar
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:51 AM Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 5:00 PM Lad Prabhakar
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the
description to reflect this.
Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
@@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCARbecalledrcar_can.configCAN_RCAR_CANFD-tristate"Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller"+tristate"Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller"depends onARCH_RENESAS||ARM
Not introduced by this patch, but the "|| ARM" looks strange to me.
Is this meant for compile-testing? Doesn't the driver compile on all
platforms (it does on m68k), so "|| COMPILE_TEST" is not appropriate?
Is the CAN FD controller present on some Renesas arm32 SoCs (but
not yet supported by this driver)?
Good catch. "|| ARM" was probably copied from CAN_RCAR config and I
can confirm CAN-FD controller doesn't exist on R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G2
G1
32bit SoC's (but with a bit of google search RZ/A2M supports CAN-FD I
am not sure if its the same controller tough), but said that there
Thanks for investigating. I knew about R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G1 not having
CAN-FD.
shouldn't be any harm in replacing "|| ARM" with "|| COMPILE_TEST"
for both CAN_RCAR_CAN{FD}. What are your thoughts?
I'd go for "|| COMPILE_TEST".
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds