[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220317205717.pfgfdxxyucmeuuwr@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 21:57:17 +0100
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To: Max Staudt <max@...as.org>
Cc: Vincent Mailhol <vincent.mailhol@...il.com>,
Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org, Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] can, tty: elmcan CAN/ldisc driver for ELM327 based
OBD-II adapters
On 17.03.2022 21:23:59, Max Staudt wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 23:04:08 +0100
> Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de> wrote:
>
> > On 09.03.2022 22:49:49, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
> > > Either we agree that using can_rx_offload without implementing
> > > the mailbox_read() is OK and in that case, the can_rx_offload
> > > framework should be modified to allow mailbox_read() to be a NULL
> > > pointer.
> > >
> > > Either it is not the case and you use the more classic
> > > netif_rx().
> > >
> > > And I do not have the answer. I haven't studied can_rx_offload
> > > enough to be a judge here. Sorry.
> > >
> > > @Marc, any thoughts?
> >
> > Use can_rx_offload_add_manual() instead.
>
> m-(
>
> Yes, it's right underneath _add_fifo() and does the right thing. No
> idea how I missed it, I thought I had looked through all variants.
I think that function was not there form the beginning, maybe you looked
at the rx-offload code when it was not available.
regards,
Marc
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde |
Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de |
Vertretung West/Dortmund | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists