Kurt Van Dijck wrote: > On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 06:25:39PM +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> christian pellegrin wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> christian pellegrin wrote: >>>> increase). Can you confirm that? Normal state changes are interrupt >>>> driver. So, if the hardware does not trigger an interrupt, we have a >>>> problem. >>> On the mcp251x we get an interrupt when we get back from error-warning >>> to error-active but I don't know if we have to send some kind of error >>> frame in this case. Now nothing is sent, I was worried if this is >>> right. >> Good question. I think we should send an error message for any state >> change also for passive->warning->active, which we currently do not >> handle by software. We speak about controller *problems* and there is >> currently no CAN_ERR_CRTL_ACTIVE. Well, that's another weak point :-(. >> This needs some more thoughts/discussion. > We had some discussion lately, but having an interrupt (and some message > to userspace) seems like a non-optional requirement to me.
I don't understand. What is "non-optional"? Currently we just report controller *problems*, meaning state changes active->warning->passive->bus-off. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
