On 07/24/2010 10:40 PM, Fawad Lateef wrote: > On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On 07/24/2010 09:15 PM, Fawad Lateef wrote: >>> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected] >>> wrote: >> >> ... >> >>>> I'm curious why you did re-write the driver. Did you try the mcp251x >>>> driver from the mainline kernel? What problems did you encounter? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Wolfgang. >>>> >>> >>> >>> I used latest socket-can from git (and I think this is same as the driver >> in >>> latest kernel, right ?). I found that this synchronous driver is not >> giving >> >> Do you mean Socket-CAN from the SVN repository? Unfortunately, it's not >> the same driver then in mainline any more. It uses IRQ threads instead >> of work queues. >> >> > Why socket-can driver and mainline kernel driver are different ? I just > looked at the diff between socket-can svn driver and linux-2.6.34.1 driver > and noticed this change. I wasn't aware of this request_threaded_irq > functionality in kernel. Thanks for the information.
Yes, I agree, that's confusing. IIRC. The driver in the SVN repos are mainly for backward compatibility. Threaded-interrupts are not available in old kernels and therefore the SVN repos was not updated. I will add some notes to the SVN driver. >>> performance according to our requirements and if bus is overloaded when >>> generating packets from other CAN controller like from PEAK or CAN-Modul >>> then system response to external events like ssh takes too much time in >>> responding. Almost a year ago one of our engineer wrote Asynchronous >> driver >>> using old mcp251x driver which performs very well, but error handling in >>> that was very bad which lock-down the system. >>> >>> So recently referencing that Async driver I re-wrote tx and rx path (sort >> of >>> merging our Async and latest Sync processing) in latest mcp251x driver >> from >>> socket-can. Now till now everything is very well with modified driver. >> >> Does it apply to the new driver in mainline? >> >> Wolfgang. >> > > I haven't tested this latest mainline kernel driver, but I doubt this will > behave somewhat similar due to its synchronous functionality. Will give this > a try soon. That would be nice, indeed. > Also some weeks ago when I asked some questions about Async implementation > in mcp251x driver then AFAIR Christian replied that he like to see Async > driver implementation. OK, any effort to improve the driver is welcome. Thanks, Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
