netdev - RE: [PATCH 0/8] can: flexcan: add CAN FD support for NXP Flexcan

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DB7PR04MB46187A6B5A8EC3A1D73D69FFE6150@DB7PR04MB4618.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:18:23 +0000
From:   Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>
To:     Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
CC:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        "wg@...ndegger.com" <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/8] can: flexcan: add CAN FD support for NXP Flexcan



Best Regards,
Joakim Zhang

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
> Sent: 2020年2月14日 16:43
> To: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>
> Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>; wg@...ndegger.com;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-can@...r.kernel.org; Pankaj Bansal
> <pankaj.bansal@....com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] can: flexcan: add CAN FD support for NXP Flexcan
> 
> Hi Joakim,
> 
> Am 2020-02-14 02:55, schrieb Joakim Zhang:
> > Hi Michal,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
> >> Sent: 2020年2月14日 3:20
> >> To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
> >> Cc: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>; wg@...ndegger.com;
> >> netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-can@...r.kernel.org; Pankaj Bansal
> >> <pankaj.bansal@....com>; Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] can: flexcan: add CAN FD support for NXP
> >> Flexcan
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> >>> Are you prepared to add back these patches as they are necessary
> >> >>> for Flexcan CAN FD? And this Flexcan CAN FD patch set is based on
> >> >>> these patches.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes, these patches will be added back.
> >> >
> >> >I've cleaned up the first patch a bit, and pushed everything to the
> >> >testing branch. Can you give it a test.
> >>
> >> What happend to that branch? FWIW I've just tried the patches on a
> >> custom board with a LS1028A SoC. Both CAN and CAN-FD are working.
> >> I've tested against a Peaktech USB CAN adapter. I'd love to see these
> >> patches upstream, because our board also offers CAN and basic support
> >> for it just made it upstream [1].
> > The FlexCAN CAN FD related patches have stayed in
> > linux-can-next/flexcan branch for a long time, I still don't know why
> > Marc doesn't merge them into Linux mainline.
> > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.
> >
> kernel.org%2Fpub%2Fscm%2Flinux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Fmkl%2Flinux-can-next.g
> >
> it%2Ftree%2F%3Fh%3Dflexcan&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cqiangqing.zhang%40n
> xp.co
> >
> m%7C94dca4472a584410b3b908d7b129db27%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c
> 5c30163
> >
> 5%7C0%7C0%7C637172665642079192&amp;sdata=77tG6VuQCi%2FZXBKb23
> 8%2FdNSV3
> > NUIFrM5Y0e9yj0J3os%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > Also must hope that this patch set can be upstreamed soon. :-)
> 
> I've took them from this branch and applied them to the latest linux master.
> 
> Thus,
> 
> Tested-by: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
> 
> 
> >> If these patches are upstream, only the device tree nodes seems to be
> >> missing.
> >> I don't know what has happened to [2]. But the patch doesn't seem to
> >> be necessary.
> > Yes, this patch is unnecessary. I have NACKed this patch for that,
> > according to FlexCAN Integrated Guide, CTRL1[CLKSRC]=0 select
> > oscillator clock and CTRL1[CLKSRC]=1 select peripheral clock.
> > But it is actually decided by SoC integration, for i.MX, the design is
> > different.
> 
> ok thanks for clarifying.
> 
> > I have not upstream i.MX FlexCAN device tree nodes, since it's
> > dependency have not upstreamed yet.
> >
> >> Pankaj already send a patch to add the device node to the LS1028A [3].
> >> Thats basically the same I've used, only that mine didn't had the
> >> "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan" compatiblity string, but only the
> >> "lx2160ar1-flexcan"
> >> which is the correct way to use it, right?
> > You can see below table from FlexCAN driver, "fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan"
> > supports CAN FD, you can use this compatible string.
> 
> correct. I've already a patch that does exactly this ;) Who would take the patch
> for adding the LS1028A can device tree nodes to ls1028a.dtsi? You or Shawn
> Guo?
Sorry, I missed the link[3], we usually write it this way:
			compatible = "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan","fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan";
Please send patch to Shawn Guo, he will review the device tree.

> > static const struct of_device_id flexcan_of_match[] = {
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx8qm-flexcan", .data =
> > &fsl_imx8qm_devtype_data, },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6q-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx6q_devtype_data,
> > },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx28-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx28_devtype_data,
> > },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx53-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx25_devtype_data,
> > },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx35-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx25_devtype_data,
> > },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx25-flexcan", .data = &fsl_imx25_devtype_data,
> > },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan", .data = &fsl_p1010_devtype_data,
> > },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,vf610-flexcan", .data = &fsl_vf610_devtype_data,
> > },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,ls1021ar2-flexcan", .data =
> > &fsl_ls1021a_r2_devtype_data, },
> > 	{ .compatible = "fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan", .data =
> > &fsl_lx2160a_r1_devtype_data, },
> > 	{ /* sentinel */ },
> > };
> >
> 
> -michael