ECC feature added to Tx and Rx FIFO’s for Xilinx CAN Controller.
Part of this feature configuration and counter registers added in
IP for 1bit/2bit ECC errors.

xlnx,has-ecc is optional property and added to Xilinx CAN Controller
node if ECC block enabled in the HW

Signed-off-by: Srinivas Goud <srinivas.goud@amd.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/xilinx,can.yaml | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/xilinx,can.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/xilinx,can.yaml
index 64d57c3..c842610 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/xilinx,can.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/xilinx,can.yaml
@@ -49,6 +49,10 @@ properties:
   resets:
     maxItems: 1
 
+  xlnx,has-ecc:
+    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag
+    description: CAN Tx and Rx fifo ECC enable flag (AXI CAN)
+
 required:
   - compatible
   - reg
@@ -137,6 +141,7 @@ examples:
         interrupts = <GIC_SPI 59 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
         tx-fifo-depth = <0x40>;
         rx-fifo-depth = <0x40>;
+        xlnx,has-ecc
     };
 
   - |
-- 
2.1.1

On 22/08/2023 12:45, Srinivas Goud wrote:
> ECC feature added to Tx and Rx FIFO’s for Xilinx CAN Controller.
> Part of this feature configuration and counter registers added in
> IP for 1bit/2bit ECC errors.
> 
> xlnx,has-ecc is optional property and added to Xilinx CAN Controller
> node if ECC block enabled in the HW
> 

Second time the same mistake... and I spoke about this mistake twice:

1.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/78b104cd-15a2-63d8-bbce-0a5593e6a151@kernel.org/

2.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/aed1592f-927f-13ab-b692-7a0745ac5733@kernel.org/

I don't understand why this is so difficult... automation solves all the
problems, there is no manual work here. :/

Anyway, standard text:

Please use scripts/get_maintainers.pl to get a list of necessary people
and lists to CC. It might happen, that command when run on an older
kernel, gives you outdated entries. Therefore please be sure you base
your patches on recent Linux kernel.

You missed at least devicetree list (maybe more), so this won't be
tested by automated tooling. Performing review on untested code might be
a waste of time, thus I will skip this patch entirely till you follow
the process allowing the patch to be tested.

Please kindly resend and include all necessary To/Cc entries.

Best regards,
Krzysztof