[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DCBDAF2.7040101@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 15:04:50 +0200
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
Subhasish Ghosh <subhasish@...tralsolutions.com>,
sachi@...tralsolutions.com,
davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Netdev@...r.kernel.org,
nsekhar@...com, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
CAN NETWORK DRIVERS <socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de>,
m-watkins@...com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] can: add pruss CAN driver.
On 05/12/2011 02:54 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 12 May 2011, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>> Well, that seems sophisticated resulting in a complex implementation
>> (may code line) also because hardware filters are very hardware
>> dependent. Usually just one global filter can be defined. I think that's
>> overkill. A simple interface using:
>>
>> ip link set can0 type can filter <id>:<mask> [<id>:<mask> ...]
>>
>> would just be fine.
>
> Ok, fair enough. Still I would suggest you first come up with
> a reasonable user interface (the one you posted may be just right,
> I don't know), and then let someone do the implementation in the
> pruss firmware that is the best match for the user interface, rather
> than the other way around.
I suggested some time ago to implement the more-or-less standard
<id>:<mask> filter instead of just a single <id> (per filter entry). The
cost is probably quite low, it's just a single AND operation per filter
entry more expensive.
regards, 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 |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (263 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists