linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: AM33XX: CAN: d_can: Add support for Bosch D

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]

Date:	Tue, 03 Apr 2012 17:33:40 +0200
From:	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To:	"AnilKumar, Chimata" <anilkumar@...com>
CC:	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
	"socketcan@...tkopp.net" <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
	"m.kleine-budde@...gutronix.de" <m.kleine-budde@...gutronix.de>,
	"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Gole, Anant" <anantgole@...com>, "Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: AM33XX: CAN: d_can: Add support for Bosch
 D_CAN controller

On 04/03/2012 04:29 PM, AnilKumar, Chimata wrote:
>>>> Please explain why this CAN controller cannot be handled by the existing
>>>> C_CAN driver, eventually with some extensions. The register layout seems
>>>> almost identical, at least.
>>>>
>>>> Wolfgang.
>>>>
>>>
>>> These are the some of the pointers I can say, why I had gone for separate
>>> file instead of existing driver:
>>> * In case of D_CAN driver we can see all the registers are 32bit length
>>>   but in case of C_CAN registers are in 16bit length.
>>
>> How many bits in these 32 bit registers are used?
> 
> In some cases (D_CAN_TXRQ, D_CAN_INTPND, D_CAN_MSGVAL) I have used all the
> bits, in some cases used few bits.
> 
> Roughly I can say that its (higher 16bits) % of usages is similar as compare
> to 16bits 
> 
> While checking the status of TXRequest registers and INT pending register,
> which is a hot code path, we have to put if checks for register access.

The c_can already has a c_can_read_reg32() function. It's for example
used in the rx_poll function. You can make it a function pointer (i.e.
pric->read_reg32()) for easy abstraction.

>>> * Some of the registers, bit masks are different, so we have to add
>>>   checks on every API for differentiating the kind of device
>>
>> Which registers are this? Can you give us an example?
> 
> I am pointing out some of the resisters
> * Single registers in case of D_CAN but multiple register in case of C_CAN
>   So masks will change MASK, ARB, INTPND
> * D_CAN_IFCMD is the combination of COMM request and COMM mask registers

Maybe you can use the read_reg32 function on both c_can and d_can.

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)