Re: [PATCH] can: xilinx CAN controller support.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tuesday 11 February 2014, Michal Simek wrote:
> >> The only remaining question is if we should create generic DT binding
> >> for fifo depth. Arnd, Rob: Any opinion about it?
> >> Definitely will be worth to have one generic binding if this is generic feature.
> >> But if this is just specific feature for us then current properties should
> >> be fine.
> >>
> >> In general all these xlnx,XXX properties just reflect all configurable options
> >> which you can setup in design tool which means that provide full hw description
> >> with all variants and they are automatically generated from tools.
> >>
> >> Please let me know what you think.
> > 
> > I like:
> > 
> >     rx-fifo-depth
> >     tx-fifo-depth
> 
> No problem with that. Let Kedar to fix it according this and he will send v2 with this.
> 

Sounds reasonable to me too.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Discussion]     [TCP Instrumentation]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Host AP]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Bluetooth Networking]     [Linux ATH6KL Networking]     [Linux Networking Users]     [Linux Coverity]     [VLAN]     [Git]     [IETF Annouce]     [Linux Assembly]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Information]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux Kernel]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]