On 06/17/2010 06:54 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > 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
I see, we don't have a #define for state changes to error active. I tend to rename CAN_ERR_CRTL_UNSPEC to CAN_ERR_CRTL_ACTIVE. But this needs some more thoughts and discussion. "CAN_ERR_CTRL" stands for controller *problems* and that's what we have implemented. I will have a closer look tomorrow. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
