From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Cc: j.hadi123@gmail.com, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Urs Thuermann <urs@isnogud.escape.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [CAN] [RFC] skb->iif usage and vcan driver background
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:37:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <467F9AED.1010309@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <467EA11A.7040109@hartkopp.net>
Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> Hello Patrick and Jamal,
>
> as i felt a bit misunderstood in the discussion about the usage of
> skb->iif and the idea behind the virtual CAN driver i created four
> PDF-slides to clarify some issues. The slides may give you the
> appropriate background why the incoming (receiving) interface is
> relevant at user level (which is unusual e.g. for PF_INET). Additionally
> i collected some points what the VCAN driver does - and especially what
> it is not for. So you will see, that approaches like VLAN (regarding
> IEEE 802.1Q) is nothing that can be done with the CAN bus by design. The
> PDF can be found at the BerliOS OSS server:
>
> http://download.berlios.de/socketcan/iif_and_vcan.pdf
I normally wouldn't have gone reading some PDF to explain a patch,
but this one was really worth it .. a couple of pictures of cars
with four applications using can0-can3 :)
> After reading the PDF ...
>
> @Patrick: The (optional) loading of the vcan module and the
> specification of the needed number of vcan devices (for the wanted
> use-case) was a very easy thing up to now that did not require any
> additional configuration nor additional userspace tools (except saying
> 'ifconfig vcan0 up'). As only the use-case required number of interfaces
> are allocated at module load time, i do not see a need for an extra
> netlink interface to implement an IMHO obsolete vcan add/remove
> mechanism. What could the implementation of the netlink API bring for
> the vcan driver use-case?
You keep talkign about "the use-case". This is *your* usage case
any just because *you* need four interfaces doesn't mean everyone
else on the world does too.
Your last slide brings it to the point: "... configured at module
load time for the needed use-case:
- number of created vcan devices (current default=4)
- perform the loopback on driver level (current default=off)"
So you *do* have parameters for configuration and you're using the
wrong interface. Either drop them or use the correct interface.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-25 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-22 3:44 [patch 0/7] CAN: Add new PF_CAN protocol family, try #3 Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 3:44 ` [patch 1/7] CAN: Allocate protocol numbers for PF_CAN Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 3:44 ` [patch 2/7] CAN: Add PF_CAN core module Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 3:44 ` [patch 3/7] CAN: Add raw protocol Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 3:44 ` [patch 4/7] CAN: Add broadcast manager (bcm) protocol Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 3:44 ` [patch 5/7] CAN: Add virtual CAN netdevice driver Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 11:02 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-22 12:22 ` Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 12:38 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-23 12:05 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-23 12:52 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-23 15:13 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-23 16:25 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-23 16:42 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-23 17:13 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-04 11:37 ` Urs Thuermann
2007-07-04 14:01 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-09 11:37 ` Urs Thuermann
2007-07-09 14:18 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-09 15:27 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-07-11 19:41 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-07-11 22:52 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-16 6:05 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-07-16 8:37 ` David Miller
2007-07-16 13:08 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-16 16:27 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-07-16 13:07 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-16 16:00 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-23 21:01 ` David Miller
2007-06-23 21:44 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-24 16:51 ` [CAN] [RFC] skb->iif usage and vcan driver background Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-25 10:37 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2007-06-25 14:50 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-23 20:51 ` [patch 5/7] CAN: Add virtual CAN netdevice driver David Miller
2007-06-23 21:49 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-22 3:44 ` [patch 6/7] CAN: Add maintainer entries Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 3:44 ` [patch 7/7] CAN: Add documentation Urs Thuermann
2007-06-22 12:34 ` [patch 0/7] CAN: Add new PF_CAN protocol family, try #3 Patrick McHardy
2007-06-22 15:57 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-06-22 16:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-22 17:19 ` Oliver Hartkopp
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=467F9AED.1010309@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=j.hadi123@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=urs@isnogud.escape.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.