[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zh6qiDwbEnaJtTvl@fedora>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:42:48 +0200
From: Francesco Valla <valla.francesco@...il.com>
To: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
Cc: Vincent Mailhol <vincent.mailhol@...il.com>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>, fabio@...aril.me
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Documentation: networking: document ISO
15765-2:2016
On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 10:21:33PM +0200, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
>
>
> On 14.04.24 06:03, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
>
> >
> > This doesn't remove the fact that I think that this naming convention
> > is stupid because of the RAS syndrome, but I acknowledge that CAN CC
> > is now the official denomination and thus, that we should adopt it in
> > our documentation as well.
> >
>
> ;-)
>
>
I honestly did not knwow the new CAN in Automation naming scheme. Will
keep the CAN-CC here. Thanks!
> > > > Add a space between ISO and the number. Also, update the year:
> > > >
> > > > ISO 15765-2:2024
> > > >
> > >
> > > Interesting! Didn't know there's already a new version.
> > >
> > > Will check this out whether we really support ISO 15765-2:2024 ...
> > >
> > > Do you have the standard at hand right now or should we leave this as
> > > ISO15765-2:2016 until we know?
> >
> > I have access to the newer revisions. But I never really invested time
> > into reading that standard (neither the 2016 nor the 2024 versions).
> >
> > Regardless, here is a verbatim extract from the Foreworld section of
> > ISO 15765-2:2024
> >
> > This fourth edition cancels and replaces the third edition (ISO
> > 15765-2:2016), which has been technically revised.
> >
> > The main changes are as follows:
> >
> > - restructured the document to achieve compatibility with OSI
> > 7-layers model;
> >
> > - introduced T_Data abstract service primitive interface to
> > achieve compatibility with ISO 14229-2;
> >
> > - moved all transport layer protocol-related information to Clause 9;
> >
> > - clarification and editorial corrections
> >
>
> Yes, I've checked the release notes on the ISO website too.
> This really looks like editorial stuff that has nothing to do with the data
> protocol and its segmentation.
>
The :2016 suffix is cited both here and inside the Kconfig. We can:
- keep the :2016 here and then update both the documentation and the
Kconfig once the standard has been checked
- move to :2024 both here and inside the Kconfig
- drop the :2016 from everywhere (leaving only ISO 15765) and move to
ISO 15765:2024 only inside the "Specifications used" paragraph
What do you think? Shall the modifications to the Kconfig be done as part of
this series?
Best regards,
Francesco Valla
Powered by blists - more mailing lists