I guess my poor wording may have gotten me in trouble. I am getting ready to repost this patch, but I want to ensure I am getting it as right as possible.
I think I should reword the commit message to indicate we are removing the Documentation/.../fsl-flexcan.txt file which has essentially become empty and change the p1010si.dtsi file's can nodes to "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan". Is that correct? Thanks, Robin On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 02:58:56PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > On 08/09/2011 02:49 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > > Yes. The doc for the bindings we speak about > > > > http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt > > > > sneaked into the kernel without been presented on any mailing list and > > without the corresponding driver patch. > > It was posted on linuxppc-dev: > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/91980/ > > Though I agree it should have been posted more widely. > > > OK, just > > > > "fsl,p1010-flexcan" > > > > or > > > > "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan" > > I'm ok with the latter, if there's enough in common that it's > conceivable that a driver wouldn't care. The more specific compatible > will be there if the driver wants to make use of it later. > > -Scot _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev