From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D93902BD033 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756110776; cv=none; b=nP/xfqCd5o5Ls+ksk18svjjo5MPfQubwvZE6E/nxs9vGWK8wRqIRoD3kDD2ecXSNEbsNgokMQo+tK8n6fASiN0Uef0YSjcaKxmAhmfRkOSsfdecYy/gnWqRFxtWQUoIL691It4gEiOyL2oCq6ct253PvLDXvR4wGiCUJiFVDdBA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756110776; c=relaxed/simple; bh=sCGB45VGwjSr55tFCErYCOMSaxRwvKF25iqxBFRHAtU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=D3yDLcKRrXN2e2SlgizJUwdM4YJISZFxsE7FhMqni3wQt16Z0hlAfddFd3R955LNwp+IHqkXeLlmbeal8IybyOogFYidVNSyppjxYM86rOJyi32d3wKMDkE93Zyy5fvIwfI0cMnGY1MN7bqAch69IToq6fbD5BZnwWHNnQirM3w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ep09O+XL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ep09O+XL" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C23A5C4CEED; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:32:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1756110776; bh=sCGB45VGwjSr55tFCErYCOMSaxRwvKF25iqxBFRHAtU=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=ep09O+XLP2YjQXEMvflPh04ekwjlWpiSBIj8JX+NONc/B/WQeV0anSgAc2W1yPsWQ 5P8hPOkHc4n/xuoWpTlxdB0VSXdetquBKFanqaj1jCMZIiXIQtViu37ZhN9YIPtGHx THgsLqU6LLhbBG20xCe/qBagF6ZW4M/stKm8dHAYFm3v0vY5l5u3M5gGh6webYBnOW +OsihGuKvby2VMZNx/udHbkl21qnX1cQd/BNrt7VhkwSjCTKioq85+S7702sNhMqnP 5ak+ynKMa/WwbP95H6Vz/kIkr9KHrUzKUOgi6+49L5pT6nocu5mA4Y7HrB/rguP2+4 eyQEhVKTYyMxQ== Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 17:32:54 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-can@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: canxl: add CANXL_PMS flag To: Oliver Hartkopp Cc: linux-can@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?Q?St=C3=A9phane_Grosjean?= , Marc Kleine-Budde , Robert Nawrath References: <20250729-can_tms-v1-1-21d0195d1dd0@kernel.org> <64bf8703-c80c-4a96-a5ad-0efc48bf0541@hartkopp.net> <5db57860-05ad-4925-a9b3-18ce2d88ab0d@hartkopp.net> Content-Language: en-US From: Vincent Mailhol Autocrypt: addr=mailhol@kernel.org; keydata= xjMEZluomRYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAf+/PnQvy9LCWNSJLbhc+AOUsR2cNVonvxhDk/KcW7FvN JFZpbmNlbnQgTWFpbGhvbCA8bWFpbGhvbEBrZXJuZWwub3JnPsKZBBMWCgBBFiEE7Y9wBXTm fyDldOjiq1/riG27mcIFAmdfB/kCGwMFCQp/CJcFCwkIBwICIgIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgcC F4AACgkQq1/riG27mcKBHgEAygbvORJOfMHGlq5lQhZkDnaUXbpZhxirxkAHwTypHr4A/joI 2wLjgTCm5I2Z3zB8hqJu+OeFPXZFWGTuk0e2wT4JzjgEZx4y8xIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEHQJrb YZzu0JG5w8gxE6EtQe6LmxKMqP6EyR33sA+BR9pLAwEIB8J+BBgWCgAmFiEE7Y9wBXTmfyDl dOjiq1/riG27mcIFAmceMvMCGwwFCQPCZwAACgkQq1/riG27mcJU7QEA+LmpFhfQ1aij/L8V zsZwr/S44HCzcz5+jkxnVVQ5LZ4BANOCpYEY+CYrld5XZvM8h2EntNnzxHHuhjfDOQ3MAkEK In-Reply-To: <5db57860-05ad-4925-a9b3-18ce2d88ab0d@hartkopp.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 25/08/2025 at 16:17, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > On 24.08.25 22:24, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > >> On 21.08.25 17:47, Vincent Mailhol wrote: > >>> I uploaded my current WIP here: >>> >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mailhol/linux.git/ log/?h=b4/ >>> canxl-netlink >>> >>> As you will be able to see, most of the features are here. Now, I am trying to >>> think of all the edge cases and make sure that any incorrect configuration is >>> correctly rejected. >>> >>> I am just sharing this to reassure everyone on the progress. The patches are not >>> yet ready for discussion. You can have a look if you want, but no need to do a >>> review as I am still making changes. >> >> I upgraded my hardware test setup to 6.17-rc3 with the patches from your b4/ >> canxl-netlink branch. >> >> Most things were easy to adapt but the netlink PWM API. >> >> Two questions: >> 1. Why did you make the PWM values u32 as the 6 bit will always fit into a u8 >> value? u32 is the common method for netlink interface. Marc raised the point here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20250528-encouraging-scallop-of-expression-2d1ebe-mkl@pengutronix.de/ and I agree with him (and anyway, my intent was to use u32 from the beginning even before Marc sent his comment). >> 2. Can you share some PWM code for the iproute2 package or do I need to adapt >> this code myself? >> >> https://github.com/hartkopp/canxl-nl/blob/main/iproute2/0005-iplink_can- >> canxl-add-PWM-config-support.patch OK. I will upload the iproute2 later on. But same as the above, it will *not* be ready for review. So, please, do not share comment for now. > Well, that was an unneeded effort as you pushed your changes just a short time > after I adapted all my code :-/ > > Can you please post your changes here on the mailing list so that the usual > development process is executed? Well, what can I say? Read again the message I posted right above: I am just sharing this to reassure everyone on the progress. The patches are not yet ready for discussion. You can have a look if you want, but no need to do a review as I am still making changes. I thought that I was clear. This is a WIP which I am sharing because you ask for it but there will be some changes until I am happy with the result. I will post it using the usual development process when I am fully happy with it. Meanwhile, it is *not* ready for review. You are welcome to play with it, but it is *not* open for discussion at the moment. > E.g. the CAN_CTRLMODE_RESTRIC_OP should be named to CAN_CTRLMODE_RESTRICTED to > meet the other configuration options. > > The listen-only operation mode is not named CAN_CTRLMODE_LISTENONLY_OP but > CAN_CTRLMODE_LISTENONLY ... I named it like that because in ISO 11898-1:2024 it is "restricted operation mode" not the "restricted mode". But I am fine to rename. As I tried to stress above, this not being ready for review, I will not be answering further comments. Sorry if I am disappointing you, but at the moment, I want to focus on the debugging by myself (and there are a few bugs I am aware of, if you expect something production ready, please do not use). Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol