On 02/15/2011 10:41 PM, Kurt Van Dijck wrote: > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 05:52:31PM +0100, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: >> On 15.02.2011 10:34, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >>> and move CAN_ERR_PROT_ACTIVE to >>> >>> /* error status of CAN-controller / data[1] */ >>> #define CAN_ERR_CRTL_ACTIVE 0x40 /* back to error active */ >>> >> >> Hm. So far only 'problems' have been encoded into this byte. We could define >> 'zero' as having 'no problems' ... but adding a new 'good situation flag' >> doesn't fit to me. > IMHO, zero may also mean: 'not filled in'. > That would favor a CAN_ERR_CTRL_ACTIVE.
That would be logically correct, from my point of view. > I'm aware that this reasoning deviates a bit as you mentioned, but > it feels better in this case. Yep. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
