Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > >>> IMHO we >>> >>> 1. need to provide some information that can be used for udev (in sysfs!) >>> 2. need to provide a netlink based interface for vendor specific functions >>> like setting the +5V on Pin1, enabling features, etc ... >>> >>> But i don't know in detail what should be added to the sysfs or what can be >>> re-used ... >> OK, I see, if the sysfs file is in the device directory (not in >> /sys/class/can*) calling device_create_file(), I see little problems to >> get it accepted. Then it would simply be device specific. Would that be >> fine? Or do we need a common interface? For me it looks very device >> specific. > > I think using sysfs is a pretty good approach for the device specific stuff. > You are right not using the netlink interface for this. > > But IMO we should discuss about obviously 'common' sysfs entries like > > serialnumber > firmwareversion > vendorstring > ... > > There are already some things defined in ethtool: > > linuxbox:~# ethtool -i eth0 > driver: tg3 > version: 3.102 > firmware-version: 5755m-v3.29 > bus-info: 0000:09:00.0 > > and whatever we add to /sys/class/net/can0/... > > it should fit into the current networking system.
ethtool uses ioctls. They will tell us to use netlink nowadays. But it might be worth a try. Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
