[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <06024a8a-ad00-8062-215b-01b2f95a6e24@hartkopp.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:26:24 +0200
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>,
Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, mark.rutland@....com,
Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
treding@...dia.com, David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
noralf@...nnes.org, johan@...nel.org,
Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>, michal.vokac@...ft.com,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, john.garry@...wei.com,
geert+renesas@...der.be, robin.murphy@....com,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
sebastien.bourdelin@...oirfairelinux.com, icenowy@...c.io,
Stuart Yoder <stuyoder@...il.com>,
"J. Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>, maxime.ripard@...tlin.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/7] Add Fieldbus subsystem + support HMS Profinet
card
Thanks Enrico!
On 24.04.19 11:40, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> On 18.04.19 19:34, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
>
>> If you have a fieldbus device you want to add to mainline Linux, and> you wish to piggy-back onto the fieldbus_dev subsystem, then we can>
> discuss fieldbus API changes/additions/improvements during the> patch
> review stage.
> With those cases, piggy-backing wouldn't make much sense, as their
> semantics is pretty different.
>
> My whole point here was just that it shouldn't be called "fieldbus",
> but iec61158 instead.
>
Full ACK!
The Controller Area Network also belongs to the class of field busses
and has its own networking subsystem in linux/net/can.
So using a 'class' of communication protocols as naming scheme doesn't
fit IMHO.
Best regards,
Oliver
Powered by blists - more mailing lists