I have spent some more time working on this.  I took their code from the
April BSP and am reworking it to be a much cleaner (IMHO) implementation.
Hopefully I will have a set of patches for you tomorrow.

Right now, I am down to the point of getting the _probe function
abstracted off.  I think I will get it fairly clean when I am completed.

More tomorrow.

Thanks,
Robin

On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 07:04:10PM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:01:09PM +0200, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> > Hey Robin,
> > 
> > do you know "Mike Brown <mtb at sgi dot com>", he's working with the
> > powerpc flexcan, too.
> > 
> > On 08/03/2011 09:44 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> > > I am trying to get the current kernel working with either Greg KH's
> > > linux-3.0.y stable release tree or Linus' current tree.  I have it
> > > compiling and booting, but the flexcan driver's flexcan_probe() function
> > > never gets called.
> > > 
> > > I have made minor changes to the source to get it to compile.  The BSP
> > > from freescale based upon the 2.6.35 kernel has a flexcan driver which is
> > > significantly different from the current driver.  Some of the differences
> > > are to handle the of_platform changes they have in that version of
> > > their kernel.
> > 
> > Freescale decided not to mainline their flexcan changes, moreover they
> > introduces some bugs into the driver. I send some bugfixes but they
> > didn't react.
> > 
> > https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/socketcan-users/2011-July/001989.html
> > https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/socketcan-users/2011-July/001990.html
> > https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/socketcan-users/2011-July/001986.html
> > 
> > > Does anybody know what needs to be done to get the flexcan driver working
> > > for the P1010 processor?  Any suggestions on things I may need to do to
> > > get it working?  Any guidance at all will be very welcome.
> > 
> > I started hacking a bit on the driver, but as I don't have any hardware,
> > not clients willing to sponsor (hint, hint!) the work, it's not
> > bit-rotting in my git. Maybe it helps you (thee uppermost patches):
> > 
> > http://git.pengutronix.de/?p=mkl/linux-2.6.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/can/flexcan-dt/net-next
> 
> We have two P1010RDB boards which have the CAN interfaces.  Unfortunately,
> I am sharing one with other developers and the other is completely out
> of my control with the exception of a periodic update I am doing to it.
> 
> Looking over the patches, it looks like your changes are merely breaking
> up the differences between the slightly stale kernel bits and what was
> in the Freescale April BSP.  Is that correct?  If so, I can work on
> those a bit.
> 
> The debug patch looks like it could really stand some rework.  I did
> use their debug bits when I was trying to get the driver working on
> our P1010RDB and it was helpful.  It could be done better with some
> static inlines.
> 
> Is there a reason these have not been proposed for inclusion in mainline?
> Have you tested arm with these applied?  I do not have any arm hardware
> to test with.
> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
_______________________________________________
Socketcan-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users

Reply via email to