From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Grandegger Subject: Re: What are you doing if the TX buffer overflows? Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:39:19 +0200 Message-ID: <50587987.3070308@grandegger.com> References: <2478881.znSzbTXnK5@uschi> <505777BC.3000705@hartkopp.net> <5058659E.2010804@grandegger.com> <50586A50.5060300@pengutronix.de> <50586DE4.9020707@grandegger.com> <50587058.7090703@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: Received: from ngcobalt02.manitu.net ([217.11.48.102]:53531 "EHLO ngcobalt02.manitu.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757122Ab2IRNj2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:39:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <50587058.7090703@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-can-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Marc Kleine-Budde Cc: Oliver Hartkopp , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Heinz-J=FCrg?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?en_Oertel?= , "linux-can@vger.kernel.org" On 09/18/2012 03:00 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 09/18/2012 02:49 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > [...] > >>> We have several customers who asked how to abort pending TX messages, >>> too. Which involves: >>> a) clear the TX-queue in Linux >>> b) clear queue in hardware >>> c) abort currently transmitting CAN frame >>> >>> I think c) would be a usecase of its own, too. >> >> I think you need c) for b), at least for some controllers. These > > Yes, if it's a hardware limitation so be it. But if we design an > interface it should support "clear everything" (a+b+c), but also just > only c. Yes, that you be nice. The only portable "clear everything" (a+b+c) I see is "ifconfig down -> up". This also answers you other related mail. What do people really want/need and why? This is still not clear to me. More input would be nice. Wolfgang.