RE: [PATCH 2/6] dt-bindings: can: mcp25xxfd: document device tree bindings

[Thomas.Kopp]

> So far in that name space there are the mcp2510, mcp2515 and mcp25625.
> From the
> SW point of view the 2515 and 25625 are identical while being compatible
> to the
> mcp2510 but offer more features. There's a single drver (mcp251x) for
> these.
> These chips implement the CAN-2.0 standard.
> 
> Regarding the mcp2517fd and mcp2518fd, the "fd" in the name references
> the
> CAN-FD standard (successor to CAN-2.0).
> 
> Maybe Thomas Kopp (Cc'ed) from Microchip can say something to this.
> 
> We can rename the compatible to mcp251xfd to make it more specific.
I agree that mcp251xfd would be a good fit. We already have (theoretical)
conflicts for the xx in the namespace e.g. the MCP2542FD which is a 
transceiver without any controller functionality.

Although hard to guarantee I think it's fair to assume that no MCP251xFD 
will be released that is incompatible.

Thomas