From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <44D73EE3.4010809@domain.hid> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 15:23:47 +0200 From: Wolfgang Grandegger MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <44CF6EB1.1010808@domain.hid> <44D36389.3030706@domain.hid> <44D4A0E4.5070703@domain.hid> <44D4CAE9.9000800@domain.hid> <44D4E38D.9060007@domain.hid> <44D4FF53.8000904@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <44D4FF53.8000904@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Xenomai-core] Re: [Xenomai-help] [ANNOUNCE] RTDM driver for CAN devices List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Jan Kiszka wrote: > Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >>>>> - Well known issue: the RTCAN name. This should definitely get resolved >>>>> before we merge. Any feedback already? >>>> I contacted the author. If I will not get an answer soon, I tend >>>> changing the global name to RT-Socket-CAN (rtsocketcan). >>> I would really hate to have a drivers/rtsocketcan or a >>> rtdm/rtsocketcan.h. The short name is so much nicer. >> He did not say, that we cannot use the name RTCAN but he prefers that we >> use a different name to avoid confusion. Therefore I suggest to use the >> offical name "RT-Socket-CAN" for the project, but leave almost all >> internal rtcan prefixes as they are apart from: >> >> drivers/rtsocketcan >> rtdm/rtsocketcan.h >> >> Note that the API does use the Linux naming in most cases (with the >> prefix can). >> >> Another possibility would be to use rtscan as short form for rtsocketcan >> as prefix. >> >> What do you think? Well, it's just a name. > > Never underestimate naming. Ok, I have this proposal now: > > o drivers/can/ - That's consistent with the existing subdir naming > anyway. I was also thinking about that. > o rtdm/rtcan.h - The "rtdm/" prefix clearly defines the context: It's > THE standard real-time CAN profile for RTDM. > > o All references to "RTCAN" in comments, READMEs, headers, etc. must be > changed to RT-Socket-CAN. So it should be clear that this has nothing > to do with the existing "rtcan" project. > > o Variable, type, and function names remain as they are. OK, thats fine for me. The important thing is, that the official project name is different from RTCAN. > Jan > > > PS: Another point for the long-term to-do list :-> : The nested locking > and the global scope of certain locks. It's safe, it's harmless for > current primary target platforms (UP), but it's not really beautiful > when considering SMP setups. A bit tricky, for sure. Yes, it's also not nice, that it is in the HW specific driver. I did not touch it because I have no SMP system for testing. Wolfgang.