From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073CEC34023 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:52:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC4DD2070B for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:52:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="HURDfCsN" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728744AbgBQNwe (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2020 08:52:34 -0500 Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.249]:60064 "EHLO lelv0142.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726710AbgBQNwe (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2020 08:52:34 -0500 Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 01HDqCYC046134; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:52:12 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1581947532; bh=+byLAupfUW+GTMI0YH08CXSZf3dS/A6iBoU8mYL7Bjs=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=HURDfCsN2H10t7joYw6Uc17TbFSzb3Bapj1w2k5EsFytBbtFsNE9Ny8ytRK5p2oF+ nktDfWEC01tDiWJfk602k506HngSFs22HRsrfGjm16bvB3ZbUYwepME7vLxUSYHmzQ 16vYOXQYxGv0LZT4rKidGd0bxJb6KgY4O1fDvNi8= Received: from DLEE108.ent.ti.com (dlee108.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.38]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 01HDqCNK060998 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:52:12 -0600 Received: from DLEE114.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.25) by DLEE108.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:52:11 -0600 Received: from lelv0327.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.183) by DLEE114.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:52:11 -0600 Received: from [172.24.190.4] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by lelv0327.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 01HDq6xY041711; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:52:07 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: net: can: m_can: Add Documentation for stb-gpios To: Rob Herring CC: Dan Murphy , Sekhar Nori , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20200122080310.24653-1-faiz_abbas@ti.com> <20200122080310.24653-2-faiz_abbas@ti.com> <8fc7c343-267d-c91c-0381-60990cfc35e8@ti.com> <57baeedc-9f51-7b92-f190-c0bbd8525a16@ti.com> <20200203120610.GA9303@bogus> From: Faiz Abbas Message-ID: <15ae4d0e-10cf-7b4b-6487-8b64f885f184@ti.com> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 19:23:52 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200203120610.GA9303@bogus> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rob, On 03/02/20 5:36 pm, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 01:09:41PM +0530, Faiz Abbas wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 22/01/20 8:04 pm, Dan Murphy wrote: >>> Sekhar >>> >>> On 1/22/20 8:24 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote: >>>> On 22/01/20 7:05 PM, Dan Murphy wrote: >>>>> Faiz >>>>> >>>>> On 1/22/20 2:03 AM, Faiz Abbas wrote: >>>>>> The CAN transceiver on some boards has an STB pin which is >>>>>> used to control its standby mode. Add an optional property >>>>>> stb-gpios to toggle the same. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori >>>>>> --- >>>>>>    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt | 2 ++ >>>>>>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt >>>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt >>>>>> index ed614383af9c..cc8ba3f7a2aa 100644 >>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/m_can.txt >>>>>> @@ -48,6 +48,8 @@ Optional Subnode: >>>>>>                  that can be used for CAN/CAN-FD modes. See >>>>>>                 >>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/can-transceiver.txt >>>>>>                  for details. >>>>>> +stb-gpios        : gpio node to toggle the STB (standby) signal on >>>>>> the transceiver >>>>>> + >>>>> The m_can.txt is for the m_can framework.  If this is specific to the >>>>> platform then it really does not belong here. >>>>> >>>>> If the platform has specific nodes then maybe we need a >>>>> m_can_platform.txt binding for specific platform nodes.  But I leave >>>>> that decision to Rob. >>>> Since this is transceiver enable, should this not be in >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/can-transceiver.txt? >>> >> >> The transceiver node is just a node without an associated device. I had >> tried to convert it to a phy implementation but that idea got shot down >> here: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1006238/ > > Nodes and drivers are not a 1-1 thing. Is the transceiver a separate h/w > device? If so, then it should be a separate node and properties of that > device go in its node. The transceiver is indeed a separate device. Also, nothing is stopping you from using the PHY > binding without using the kernel's PHY framework. The phy framework seemed like the best code reuse to implement it. > > As to whether it should be a separate phy driver, I think probably the > wrong decision was made. We always seem to start out with no PHY on > these things and the complexity just grows until we need one. > We should be able to handle two properties (one max-datarate and the other regulator node) for now. If we have to add more complex parts then maybe we can think about the driver. I am just adding a xceiver regulator for now. Thanks, Faiz