Re: [can-utils] J1939 v6 (#7)

[Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1400 bytes --]

On 09/29/2015 08:34 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> Hi Kurt,
> 
> I'm sorry but I still think that your implementation and configuration
> is way to complex and not intuitive.
> If you look at http://elinux.org/J1939
> $ modprobe can-j1939
> $ ip link set can0 j1939 on
> still looks weird. Adding addresses to CAN interfaces is not common -
> and if you think about this kind of assignment, it should be implemented
> inside the j1939 stuff and not in af_can.c. The can-gw routing netlink
> API was integrated in gw.c too. IMO the sockaddr_can extension would be
> ok - but the other implementation should be made without af_can.[ch]
> changes.
> 
> I remember our discussion about the address claiming but I wonder if we
> really follow the requirement to only put functionality into the kernel
> that really has to be implemented there.
> 
> Did you take a look at https://github.com/ISOBlue/isoblue-software -
> which is far simpler - whether it can fulfill the basic functionalities
> (segmentation, etc.) to enable j1939 for Linux?

Can we switch to the mailinglist for the discussion.

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   |


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]