From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Hartkopp Subject: Re: [Gitorious] Activity: prabhakar requested a merge of prab... Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 18:30:07 +0200 Message-ID: <53A8560F.4060607@hartkopp.net> References: <53a829dc98811_78d23ff48250bea851769@ratt.gitorious.c.bitbit.net.mail> <53A851DC.2060801@hartkopp.net> <53A85445.8070400@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([81.169.146.219]:8503 "EHLO mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756019AbaFWQaL (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jun 2014 12:30:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <53A85445.8070400@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Marc Kleine-Budde , prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com Cc: "linux-can@vger.kernel.org" On 23.06.2014 18:22, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 06/23/2014 06:12 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: >> Hi Prabhakar, >> >> thanks for your patch. >> >> Can you please send it with git send-email to the mailing list for a review? >> >> Additionally: >> >> Does this patch introduce any backward compatibility restrictions (e.g. you >> need at least the includes from 2.6.14+ to build candump ...). > > When was CAN support added to the linux kernel? :) I know that you would detect this joke ;-) Btw. I backported SocketCAN to 2.6.13 - so my question is not totally brain-damaged when talking about the can-utils which are not sticking to a specific kernel version. > >> You only provide to configure a value for SCHED_RR. >> Does it make sense to provide other scheduling policies too? > > I would use chrt to start the tool, if I need non standard scheduling > policies. But then you would like to specifiy the scheduling policy?? Regards, Oliver