On 03/11/2013 10:29 AM, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Robert Schwebel wrote:
>> Hi Kurt,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:05:48AM +0100, Kurt Van Dijck wrote:
>>> Could I just mark j1939 as "EXPERIMENTAL" in Kconfig.
>>> I think that is what I've seen most for 'unstable concepts'.
>>
>> EXPERIMENTAL is considered to be deprecated and might be removed from
>> the kernel, so I wouldn't go down that road. Staging sounds right.
> 
> I see.
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/CodingStyle?id=v3.9-rc2#n549
> 
> Is such thing then appropriate?

Does j1939 have a protocol number? Probably. If so, we shouldn't use the
"next free" one for an experimental protocol.

Marc

> 
> --
> diff --git a/net/can/j1939/Kconfig b/net/can/j1939/Kconfig
> index 74d2a86..0db6545 100644
> --- a/net/can/j1939/Kconfig
> +++ b/net/can/j1939/Kconfig
> @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
>  #
>  
>  config CAN_J1939
> -	tristate "SAE J1939"
> +	tristate "SAE J1939 (unstable API)"
>  	depends on CAN
>  	---help---
>  	  SAE J1939
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ config CAN_J1939
>  	  The relevant parts in kernel are
>  	  SAE j1939-21 (datalink & transport protocol)
>  	  & SAE j1939-81 (network management).
> +	  Big fat warning: The API is yet unstable!
>  
>  config CAN_J1939_DEBUG
>  	bool "debug SAE J1939"
> 


-- 
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   |