Re: [Xenomai-core] CAN_RAW, CAN_PROTO_RAW, and Socket-CAN

2007-04-15 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger
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

2007-04-15 Thread Jan Kiszka
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

2007-04-15 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger
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

2007-04-15 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger
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

2007-04-15 Thread Jan Kiszka
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

2007-04-15 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger
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

2007-04-15 Thread Jan Kiszka
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