linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 v2] can: Topcliff: PCH

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <001501cb8567$c7a38820$66f8800a@maildom.okisemi.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:25:06 +0900
From:	"Tomoya MORINAGA" <tomoya-linux@....okisemi.com>
To:	"Wolfgang Grandegger" <wg@...ndegger.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Wolfram Sang" <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
	"Christian Pellegrin" <chripell@...e.org>,
	"Barry Song" <21cnbao@...il.com>,
	"Samuel Ortiz" <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	<socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <andrew.chih.howe.khor@...el.com>,
	<qi.wang@...el.com>, <margie.foster@...el.com>,
	<yong.y.wang@...el.com>,
	"Masayuki Ohtake" <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>,
	<kok.howg.ewe@...el.com>, <joel.clark@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 v2] can: Topcliff: PCH_CAN driver: Add Flow control,

On Monday, November 15, 2010 11:21 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:

> 
> More comments to the lec handling below.
> 
> > + cf->data[6] = ioread32(&priv->regs->errc) & PCH_TEC;
> > + cf->data[7] = (ioread32(&priv->regs->errc) & PCH_REC) >> 8;
> 
> Could be handle with just *one* register access.

I will modify.

>   if (reg_stat & PCH_BUS_OFF ||
>     (reg_stat & PCH_LEC_ALL) != PCH_LEC_ALL) {
> 
> Your lec handling is still not correc, 

I will modify like above.

> I believe. The driver needs to
> write PCH_LEC_ALL to the "stat" register once in the initialization code
This is NOT true.
I heard even if CAN driver detects PCH_LEC_ALL, the driver doesn't have to
write PCH_LEC_ALL to LEC.
"PCH_LEC_ALL" means there is no error event.
In case error is occurred, lec value is updated automatically.


> and then after each error observed (lec != PCH_LEC_ALL). I still do not
> find such code. Could you show us the output of
> 
>   "# candump any,0:0,#FFFFFFFF"
> 
> when yo send CAN messages *without* a cable connected?.


[root@...alhost can-utils]# ./candump any,0:0,#FFFFFFFF
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME
  can0  20000024  [8] 00 28 00 00 00 00 88 00   ERRORFRAME

......It seems the same line continues forever.

---
Thanks,

Tomoya MORINAGA
OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/