Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > 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.
ACK, I see the need for discussion, too. However, if your time permits, have a look at the above mentioned state machine. Don't look to close at the individual bits that are send in the states, they can be discussed seperately. cheers, Marc -- 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
