netdev - Re: [PATCH] can: rcar: Update help description for CAN_RCAR

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]

Message-ID: <CA+V-a8uzTWqOGxMVi+ZJwNWRfj9ANxzAqEhLaQLoDiVcwwCUWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Jan 2021 13:37:45 +0000
From:   "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2@...esas.com>
Cc:     Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>,
        Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: rcar: Update help description for CAN_RCAR_CANFD config

Hi Geert,

Thank you for the review.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:51 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Prabhakar,
>
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 5:00 PM Lad Prabhakar
> <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com> wrote:
> > The rcar_canfd driver supports R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoC's, update the
> > description to reflect this.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
>
> > --- a/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/net/can/rcar/Kconfig
> > @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ config CAN_RCAR
> >           be called rcar_can.
> >
> >  config CAN_RCAR_CANFD
> > -       tristate "Renesas R-Car CAN FD controller"
> > +       tristate "Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 CAN FD controller"
> >         depends on ARCH_RENESAS || ARM
>
> Not introduced by this patch, but the "|| ARM" looks strange to me.
> Is this meant for compile-testing? Doesn't the driver compile on all
> platforms (it does on m68k), so "|| COMPILE_TEST" is not appropriate?
> Is the CAN FD controller present on some Renesas arm32 SoCs (but
> not yet supported by this driver)?
>
Good catch. "|| ARM" was probably copied from CAN_RCAR config and I
can confirm CAN-FD controller doesn't exist on R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G2
32bit SoC's (but with a bit of google search RZ/A2M supports CAN-FD I
am not sure if its the same controller tough), but said that there
shouldn't be any harm in replacing  "|| ARM" with "|| COMPILE_TEST"
for both CAN_RCAR_CAN{FD}. What are your thoughts?

Cheers,
Prabhakar



> >         help
> >           Say Y here if you want to use CAN FD controller found on
> > -         Renesas R-Car SoCs. The driver puts the controller in CAN FD only
> > -         mode, which can interoperate with CAN2.0 nodes but does not support
> > -         dedicated CAN 2.0 mode.
> > +         Renesas R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 SoCs. The driver puts the
> > +         controller in CAN FD only mode, which can interoperate with
> > +         CAN2.0 nodes but does not support dedicated CAN 2.0 mode.
> >
> >           To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module will
> >           be called rcar_canfd.
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                         Geert
>
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>                                 -- Linus Torvalds