| Message ID | 20201231155957.31165-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | can: rcar: Update help description for CAN_RCAR_CANFD config | expand |
Hi Prabhakar, Thanks for the patch. > -----Original Message----- > From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> > Sent: 31 December 2020 16:00 > To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>; Wolfgang Grandegger > <wg@grandegger.com>; Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>; David S. > Miller <davem@davemloft.net>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>; Masahiro > Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> > Cc: linux-can@vger.kernel.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org; Prabhakar > <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com>; Prabhakar Mahadev Lad <prabhakar.mahadev- > lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> > Subject: [PATCH] can: rcar: Update help description for CAN_RCAR config > > The rcar_can driver supports R-Car Gen{1,2,3} and RZ/G{1,2} SoC's, update > the description to reflect this. Not sure we need to make it generic like dropping {1,2,3}/{1,2} and instead use R-Car and RZ/G SoC's?? Cheers, Biju > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> > --- > drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > index 8d36101b78e3..6bb0e7c052ad 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > @@ -1,10 +1,10 @@ > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > config CAN_RCAR > - tristate "Renesas R-Car CAN controller" > + tristate "Renesas R-Car Gen{1,2,3} and RZ/G{1,2} CAN controller" > depends on ARCH_RENESAS || ARM > help > Say Y here if you want to use CAN controller found on Renesas R- > Car > - SoCs. > + Gen{1,2,3} and RZ/G{1,2} SoCs. > > To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will > be called rcar_can. > -- > 2.17.1
On 1/1/21 6:06 PM, Biju Das wrote: >> The rcar_can driver supports R-Car Gen{1,2,3} and RZ/G{1,2} SoC's, update >> the description to reflect this. > > Not sure we need to make it generic like dropping {1,2,3}/{1,2} and instead > use R-Car and RZ/G SoC's?? Sounds good. Better make the description more generic instead of updating it each time a new SoC comes along. regards, Marc -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Hi Prabhakar, On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 5:00 PM Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> wrote: > The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the > description to reflect this. > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> > --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCAR > be called rcar_can. > > config CAN_RCAR_CANFD > - tristate "Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller" > + tristate "Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller" > depends on ARCH_RENESAS || ARM Not introduced by this patch, but the "|| ARM" looks strange to me. Is this meant for compile-testing? Doesn't the driver compile on all platforms (it does on m68k), so "|| COMPILE_TEST" is not appropriate? Is the CAN FD controller present on some Renesas arm32 SoCs (but not yet supported by this driver)? > help > Say Y here if you want to use CAN FD controller found on > - Renesas R-Car SoCs. The driver puts the controller in CAN FD only > - mode, which can interoperate with CAN2.0 nodes but does not support > - dedicated CAN 2.0 mode. > + Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoCs. The driver puts the > + controller in CAN FD only mode, which can interoperate with > + CAN2.0 nodes but does not support dedicated CAN 2.0 mode. > > To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will > be called rcar_canfd. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Hi Geert, Thank you for the review. On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:51 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Hi Prabhakar, > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 5:00 PM Lad Prabhakar > <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> wrote: > > The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the > > description to reflect this. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> > > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> > > > --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > > @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCAR > > be called rcar_can. > > > > config CAN_RCAR_CANFD > > - tristate "Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller" > > + tristate "Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller" > > depends on ARCH_RENESAS || ARM > > Not introduced by this patch, but the "|| ARM" looks strange to me. > Is this meant for compile-testing? Doesn't the driver compile on all > platforms (it does on m68k), so "|| COMPILE_TEST" is not appropriate? > Is the CAN FD controller present on some Renesas arm32 SoCs (but > not yet supported by this driver)? > Good catch. "|| ARM" was probably copied from CAN_RCAR config and I can confirm CAN-FD controller doesn't exist on R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G2 32bit SoC's (but with a bit of google search RZ/A2M supports CAN-FD I am not sure if its the same controller tough), but said that there shouldn't be any harm in replacing "|| ARM" with "|| COMPILE_TEST" for both CAN_RCAR_CAN{FD}. What are your thoughts? Cheers, Prabhakar > > help > > Say Y here if you want to use CAN FD controller found on > > - Renesas R-Car SoCs. The driver puts the controller in CAN FD only > > - mode, which can interoperate with CAN2.0 nodes but does not support > > - dedicated CAN 2.0 mode. > > + Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoCs. The driver puts the > > + controller in CAN FD only mode, which can interoperate with > > + CAN2.0 nodes but does not support dedicated CAN 2.0 mode. > > > > To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will > > be called rcar_canfd. > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > -- Linus Torvalds
Hi Prabhakar, On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 2:38 PM Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:51 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 5:00 PM Lad Prabhakar > > <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> wrote: > > > The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the > > > description to reflect this. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> > > > > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > > > +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig > > > @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCAR > > > be called rcar_can. > > > > > > config CAN_RCAR_CANFD > > > - tristate "Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller" > > > + tristate "Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller" > > > depends on ARCH_RENESAS || ARM > > > > Not introduced by this patch, but the "|| ARM" looks strange to me. > > Is this meant for compile-testing? Doesn't the driver compile on all > > platforms (it does on m68k), so "|| COMPILE_TEST" is not appropriate? > > Is the CAN FD controller present on some Renesas arm32 SoCs (but > > not yet supported by this driver)? > > > Good catch. "|| ARM" was probably copied from CAN_RCAR config and I > can confirm CAN-FD controller doesn't exist on R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G2 G1 > 32bit SoC's (but with a bit of google search RZ/A2M supports CAN-FD I > am not sure if its the same controller tough), but said that there Thanks for investigating. I knew about R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G1 not having CAN-FD. > shouldn't be any harm in replacing "|| ARM" with "|| COMPILE_TEST" > for both CAN_RCAR_CAN{FD}. What are your thoughts? I'd go for "|| COMPILE_TEST". Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig index 6bb0e7c052ad..a669b9ac8057 100644 --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCAR be called rcar_can. config CAN_RCAR_CANFD - tristate "Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller" + tristate "Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller" depends on ARCH_RENESAS || ARM help Say Y here if you want to use CAN FD controller found on - Renesas R-Car SoCs. The driver puts the controller in CAN FD only - mode, which can interoperate with CAN2.0 nodes but does not support - dedicated CAN 2.0 mode. + Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoCs. The driver puts the + controller in CAN FD only mode, which can interoperate with + CAN2.0 nodes but does not support dedicated CAN 2.0 mode. To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will be called rcar_canfd.
The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the description to reflect this. Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> --- drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)