[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:05:45 +0100
From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
To: Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>
CC: Masayuki Ohtake <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>,
Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya-linux@....okisemi.com>,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pch_can: fix error passive level test
On 12/12/2011 08:16 AM, Xi Wang wrote:
> The test (((errc & PCH_REC) >> 8) > 127) would always be false because
> the receive error counter ((errc & PCH_REC) >> 8) is at most 127, where
> PCH_REC is defined as 0x7f00. To test whether the receive error counter
> has reached the error passive level, the RP bit (15) should be used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>
Acked-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
The C_CAN driver, which supports the same CAN controller, does handle
the error passive state correctly. This reminds me to get rid of pch_can
in favor of C_CAN sooner than later.
Thanks,
Wolfgang.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists