linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: phy: ti,tcan104x-can: Document NXP TJA105X/1048

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID:
 <PAXPR04MB845903CF3D03A436925150238801A@PAXPR04MB8459.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 06:49:47 +0000
From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
CC: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>, Vincent Mailhol
	<mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Kishon Vijay
 Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof
 Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Aswath
 Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha
 Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Pengutronix Kernel Team
	<kernel@...gutronix.de>, Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Frank Li
	<frank.li@....com>, Bough Chen <haibo.chen@....com>,
	"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: phy: ti,tcan104x-can: Document NXP
 TJA105X/1048

> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: phy: ti,tcan104x-can:
> Document NXP TJA105X/1048
> 
...
> 
> Thanks again for the detailed reading into datasheet.
> 
> Yes. But I would like to only keep one compatible "nxp,tja1051" from a
> board design level, EN could be always tied to high for TJA1051T/E. So
> to dt-binding, EN it is optional for all TJA1051 variants.
> 
> I am thinking to use below compatible in V4 for the devices added in
> this patch. Does this look good to you?
> 
>       - items:
>           - const: nxp,tja1057
>           - const: nxp,tja1051
>       - enum:
>           ....
>           - nxp,tja1048
>           - nxp,tja1051

Considering TJA1057 does not have EN, I may need to use:
      - enum:                                                                                       
          ....
          - nxp,tja1048                                                                             
          - nxp,tja1051                                                                             
          - nxp,tja1057                                                                             
         ....

Thanks,
Peng.

>           ....
> 
> >
> > > If we need to handle differently, I need to add a new optional
> > > property
> > >
> > > silent-gpios:
> > >   description:
> > >     gpio node to toggle silent signal on transceiver
> > >   minItems: 1
> >
> > Ye, I think so. And probably add some if/then to use it instead of
> > standby on the relevant chips.
> 
> Yes. Agree.
> 
> Thanks,
> Peng.
>