On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 7:23 AM Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, Hi Oleksij, > > On 19.04.19 10:41, laurent vaudoit wrote: > > Hi all, > > we are now moving from 3.10 to 4.9.88 kernel on our project. > > I was wondering which J1939 impelmentation chose: > > > > -the old one (we have allready used on 3.10) with iproute2 patched > > (but it seems this version has not been updated since a long time > > (kernel 4.0.0?) > > this variant will never change, it is all about you to fix and maintaine it. > > > -or the new one which is on can-next branch > > (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mkl/linux-can-next.git/log/?h=j1939) > > but i'm not sure if it was tested on a 4.9 kernel (seems the branch > > comes from 5.0 kernel) > > this variant is work in progress for mainline. At this point you still have a chance to > influence the UAPI, adopt your software to it and be able to use latest fixes. > > > We have the opporunities to change, and our client agree with this, > > but i owuld like to be sure to make the correct choice. > > > > What is your opinion on this? > > Be in sync with mainline is usually best choice at start of project and probably not so > good choice at start of production. i totally agree with this. i've started looking more, and what i've seen is that the actual j1939 (from can-next) is based on can version 20170425 and the kernel we plan to use is based on 20120528 (kernel V4.9. 88), so i'm wondering how difficult this can be to use the let's say "futur mainline"j1939 stack on this kernel. Except if there is some wor allready done on this base version? > > Kind regards, > Oleksij Rempel Best regards Laurent > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
