E17 and E18 we want to use that are designated as possible CAN1 pins on the BeagleBone Black schematic.
Not using a different overlay, using the existing 4.14 kernel and 2017 I boot that Robert Nelson suggests using for the BBB. But we need to pinmux for E17 and E18 because the TI pinmuxing tool finds no conflict with these two pins on our custom board. I’ll go back and check the CAN1 but prior to Roberts changes last week that did not use the P9 expansion header, the unit pinmux used different pins CAN1 I believe. With the P9 expansion header, can’t use Roberts overlay because there is no P9 expansion header on our BBB board. I’ll go back look at the pins for CAN1 prior to then P9 overlay changes from last week by Robert. This is just basic pinmuxing. And looking for E17 and E18 pons since these are supposed to support CAN1 on the AM33xx. Thx Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 1, 2017, at 12:21 PM, William Hermans <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:17 AM, William Hermans <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:12 AM, William Hermans <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Tracy Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> We have no P9expansion header. I’ve already discussed this with Robert >>>> Nelson. We are using the AM3358 pins I sent previously. Any can using >>>> the P9and this overlay will not work for our custom board. >>> >>> Ok, good, that doesn't make a bit of difference at all. Those pin names in >>> the overlay are just variables used by the file, and initially by cape >>> manager. cape manager translates those variable names into addresses when >>> the overlay file is compiled. >>> >>> Passed that, the software that is provided could stll use the Px header >>> designation for the pins, and it'll still work fine if you're using >>> something like universal IO + config-pin, so long as you all have not done >>> something drastically different in your layout. I do recall that some >>> devices can be done using multiple pin configurations, and one in fact is >>> still like that with the beaglebone design as is. >>> >>> Anyway, I do not remember if CAN1 has the potential to be on different pins >>> or not. Out of the processor. But working with the file I sent you a link >>> to all that can easily be changed. >> >> Well technically, I'm not 100% positive on this. There could be hooks, etc >> I'm not aware of, and I have not done this hands on personally. But so long >> as you're using the same pins the bealgebone is using. It should work. >> >> Are you, or are you not using he same pins as the beaglebone for CAN1 ? > > Another thing I did not consider is that it sounds like you could be using a > completely different board file overlay for your hardware, at which point all > bets are off. > -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/09758031-8B06-438A-B9F7-304F33BEBA98%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
