Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Now I try to use more current version (rev 1181) of SocketCAN, because we >> need netlink CAN control API. Here I see one problem - no error active is >> indicated. The CAN_ERR_CRTL_UNSPEC error control messages are missed. >> I observe this problem with both sysfs and netlink variants. >> >> >> Is it known and wanted behavior, to not indicate CAN_ERR_CRTL_UNSPEC any >> more? > > Yes, this is the current (known) behavior and it has been discussed > before. We only report "increasing" state changes > active->warning->passive->bus-off. I think it's not what we really want. > It should be fixed.
Have a look at the statemachine in the at91_can driver[1]. I started to make it more generic in order to be usable as a generic component. Cheers, Marc [1] http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.34/drivers/net/can/at91_can.c#L757 -- Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 | Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Socketcan-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
