Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi Wolfgang, something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx unless I oversee something. Please have a look. There is CAN_PROTO_RAW defined and I have added some time ago CAN_RAW to rtcan.h to be compatible with Socket-CAN: /** Particular CAN protocols * * Currently only the RAW protocol is supported. */ #define CAN_RAW 0 (I received a private complaint of a user trying to compile rtcan_rtt against 2.3.x.) The latter definition is missing in 2.3.x, though and compiling rtcan_rtt.c from the trunk will fail for this reason. I'm going to fix it later today. Wolfgang. ___ Xenomai-core mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi Wolfgang, something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx unless I oversee something. Please have a look. There is CAN_PROTO_RAW defined and I have added some time ago CAN_RAW to rtcan.h to be compatible with Socket-CAN: /** Particular CAN protocols * * Currently only the RAW protocol is supported. */ #define CAN_RAW 0 Yes, I know. But the question remains which way to go for rtcan: Socket-CAN doesn't know CAN_PROTO_*, RT-Socket-CAN comes with CAN_RAW as well now, but having a different value. That should be resolved, on whatever side, IMHO. (I received a private complaint of a user trying to compile rtcan_rtt against 2.3.x.) The latter definition is missing in 2.3.x, though and compiling rtcan_rtt.c from the trunk will fail for this reason. I'm going to fix it later today. Good, thanks, Jan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Xenomai-core mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Jan Kiszka wrote: Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi Wolfgang, something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx unless I oversee something. Please have a look. There is CAN_PROTO_RAW defined and I have added some time ago CAN_RAW to rtcan.h to be compatible with Socket-CAN: /** Particular CAN protocols * * Currently only the RAW protocol is supported. */ #define CAN_RAW 0 Yes, I know. But the question remains which way to go for rtcan: Socket-CAN doesn't know CAN_PROTO_*, RT-Socket-CAN comes with CAN_RAW as well now, but having a different value. That should be resolved, on whatever side, IMHO. Ah, now I understand your concern. CAN_PROTO_RAW actually serves the same purpose then CAN_RAW defining the particular CAN protocol. I'm going to clean it up soon removing CAN_PROTO_RAW and updating the doc. CAN_PROTO_RAW was not used by any application, IIRC. Wolfgang. ___ Xenomai-core mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi Wolfgang, something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx unless I oversee something. Please have a look. There is CAN_PROTO_RAW defined and I have added some time ago CAN_RAW to rtcan.h to be compatible with Socket-CAN: /** Particular CAN protocols * * Currently only the RAW protocol is supported. */ #define CAN_RAW 0 Yes, I know. But the question remains which way to go for rtcan: Socket-CAN doesn't know CAN_PROTO_*, RT-Socket-CAN comes with CAN_RAW as well now, but having a different value. That should be resolved, on whatever side, IMHO. Ah, now I understand your concern. CAN_PROTO_RAW actually serves the same purpose then CAN_RAW defining the particular CAN protocol. I'm going to clean it up soon removing CAN_PROTO_RAW and updating the doc. CAN_PROTO_RAW was not used by any application, IIRC. The man page for socket describes the protocol argument as shown below: The protocol specifies a particular protocol to be used with the socket. Normally only a single protocol exists to support a particular socket type within a given protocol family, in which case protocol can be specified as 0. However, it is possible that many protocols may exist, in which case a particular protocol must be specified in this manner. A value of 0 is valid for RT-Socket-CAN but not for Socket-CAN. Therefore we need to define CAN_RAW=1 for compatibility reasons. Wolfgang. ___ Xenomai-core mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Hi Wolfgang, something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx unless I oversee something. Please have a look. There is CAN_PROTO_RAW defined and I have added some time ago CAN_RAW to rtcan.h to be compatible with Socket-CAN: /** Particular CAN protocols * * Currently only the RAW protocol is supported. */ #define CAN_RAW 0 Yes, I know. But the question remains which way to go for rtcan: Socket-CAN doesn't know CAN_PROTO_*, RT-Socket-CAN comes with CAN_RAW as well now, but having a different value. That should be resolved, on whatever side, IMHO. Ah, now I understand your concern. CAN_PROTO_RAW actually serves the same purpose then CAN_RAW defining the particular CAN protocol. I'm going to clean it up soon removing CAN_PROTO_RAW and updating the doc. CAN_PROTO_RAW was not used by any application, IIRC. The man page for socket describes the protocol argument as shown below: The protocol specifies a particular protocol to be used with the socket. Normally only a single protocol exists to support a particular socket type within a given protocol family, in which case protocol can be specified as 0. However, it is possible that many protocols may exist, in which case a particular protocol must be specified in this manner. A value of 0 is valid for RT-Socket-CAN but not for Socket-CAN. Therefore we need to define CAN_RAW=1 for compatibility reasons. Agreed. Moreover, 0 means unspecified default protocol according to POSIX. On what does Socket-CAN map it, CAN_RAW? Anyway, we have no other option so far with RT-Socket-CAN. Jan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Xenomai-core mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to
plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx
unless
I oversee something. Please have a look.
There is CAN_PROTO_RAW defined and I have added some time ago
CAN_RAW to
rtcan.h to be compatible with Socket-CAN:
/** Particular CAN protocols
*
* Currently only the RAW protocol is supported.
*/
#define CAN_RAW 0
Yes, I know. But the question remains which way to go for rtcan:
Socket-CAN doesn't know CAN_PROTO_*, RT-Socket-CAN comes with CAN_RAW as
well now, but having a different value. That should be resolved, on
whatever side, IMHO.
Ah, now I understand your concern. CAN_PROTO_RAW actually serves the
same purpose then CAN_RAW defining the particular CAN protocol. I'm
going to clean it up soon removing CAN_PROTO_RAW and updating the doc.
CAN_PROTO_RAW was not used by any application, IIRC.
The man page for socket describes the protocol argument as shown below:
The protocol specifies a particular protocol to be used with the
socket. Normally only a single protocol exists to support a
particular socket type within a given protocol family, in which
case protocol can be specified as 0. However, it is possible that
many protocols may exist, in which case a particular protocol
must be specified in this manner.
A value of 0 is valid for RT-Socket-CAN but not for Socket-CAN.
Therefore we need to define CAN_RAW=1 for compatibility reasons.
Agreed.
Moreover, 0 means unspecified default protocol according to POSIX. On
what does Socket-CAN map it, CAN_RAW? Anyway, we have no other option so
far with RT-Socket-CAN.
int rtcan_raw_socket(struct rtdm_dev_context *context,
rtdm_user_info_t *user_info, int protocol)
{
/* Only CAN_PROTO_RAW is supported */
if (protocol != CAN_PROTO_RAW protocol != 0)
return -EPROTONOSUPPORT;
rtcan_socket_init(context);
return 0;
}
Both, protocol 0 and CAN_PROTO_RAW is OK. I just need to replace
CAN_PROTO_RAW with CAN_RAW.
Wolfgang.
Jan
___
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to
plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx
unless
I oversee something. Please have a look.
There is CAN_PROTO_RAW defined and I have added some time ago
CAN_RAW to
rtcan.h to be compatible with Socket-CAN:
/** Particular CAN protocols
*
* Currently only the RAW protocol is supported.
*/
#define CAN_RAW 0
Yes, I know. But the question remains which way to go for rtcan:
Socket-CAN doesn't know CAN_PROTO_*, RT-Socket-CAN comes with
CAN_RAW as
well now, but having a different value. That should be resolved, on
whatever side, IMHO.
Ah, now I understand your concern. CAN_PROTO_RAW actually serves the
same purpose then CAN_RAW defining the particular CAN protocol. I'm
going to clean it up soon removing CAN_PROTO_RAW and updating the doc.
CAN_PROTO_RAW was not used by any application, IIRC.
The man page for socket describes the protocol argument as shown
below:
The protocol specifies a particular protocol to be used with the
socket. Normally only a single protocol exists to support a
particular socket type within a given protocol family, in which
case protocol can be specified as 0. However, it is possible that
many protocols may exist, in which case a particular protocol
must be specified in this manner.
A value of 0 is valid for RT-Socket-CAN but not for Socket-CAN.
Therefore we need to define CAN_RAW=1 for compatibility reasons.
Agreed.
Moreover, 0 means unspecified default protocol according to POSIX. On
what does Socket-CAN map it, CAN_RAW? Anyway, we have no other option so
far with RT-Socket-CAN.
int rtcan_raw_socket(struct rtdm_dev_context *context,
rtdm_user_info_t *user_info, int protocol)
{
/* Only CAN_PROTO_RAW is supported */
if (protocol != CAN_PROTO_RAW protocol != 0)
return -EPROTONOSUPPORT;
rtcan_socket_init(context);
return 0;
}
Both, protocol 0 and CAN_PROTO_RAW is OK. I just need to replace
CAN_PROTO_RAW with CAN_RAW.
Perfect.
Jan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
[Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN
Hi Wolfgang, something is inconsistent about CAN_RAW in RT-Socket-CAN compared to plain Socket-CAN. Also, the latter doesn't know any CAN_PROTO_xxx unless I oversee something. Please have a look. (I received a private complaint of a user trying to compile rtcan_rtt against 2.3.x.) Jan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomai-core@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
