Hi Oliver, On 01/09/2011 12:01 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > On 06.01.2011 21:08, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Hi Marc, >> >> On 01/06/2011 08:44 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > >>> If this driver will be merged, we'll have two drivers for the same can >>> core in the tree. The other one is the pch_can. What do you think should >>> be the mid term perspective for ccan based hardware? >> >> Yes, I know. Unfortunately, we did realize rather late the the PCH >> controller is a C_CAN clone and the OKI/Intel ppls did not tell us >> either. Therefore I asked Bhupesh to provide a SJA1000-a-like interface >> for the C_CAN, which would allow us to provide an alternative PCI driver >> "pch_pci.c" for the PCH. If that driver works well on the PCH hardware >> as well, we should merge the best of both, if necessary, and then >> finally remove the pch_can driver. Would that be a reasonable proposal. > > At least for me this looks great. The idea to have a similar approach as we > successfully implemented for the sja1000 will solve future hardware > implementations based on the ccan controller core.
A common driver for c_can based devices will stabilize more quickly and does also especially reduce the maintanance effort significantly. > BTW. for the next submission of Bhupeshs patchset, i would propose to name the > driver 'ccan' instead of 'c_can', so that we have a > > linux/drivers/net/can/ccan/... > > path. You are late ;-). Bosch named the controller *C_CAN* and therefore I asked Bhupesh some time ago to change the file name and variable name prefix from ccan to c_can. > Checking directory names in linux/drivers with > > find . -type d | grep '_' > > driver names with underscores are pretty unusual and mostly selected without > fortune: > > ./staging/olpc_dcon > ./staging/wlags49_h2 > ./staging/wlags49_h2/man > ./staging/serqt_usb2 > ./staging/intel_sst > ./staging/quatech_usb2 > ./staging/asus_oled > ./staging/wlags49_h25 > ./staging/ath6kl/hif/sdio/linux_sdio <- Ugh! > ./staging/ath6kl/hif/sdio/linux_sdio/src > ./staging/ath6kl/hif/sdio/linux_sdio/include > ./net/pch_gbe > ./net/fs_enet > ./net/wireless/libertas_tf > ./net/ibm_newemacds > > For that reason i would prefer 'ccan' to name this driver core. Well, not really a strong argument. But well, if other people do *prefer* ccan I would not object against it. Bhupesh, what's your opinion. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
