On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 21:24:42 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 12/5/20 12:26 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > > On 05.12.20 04:44, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >> On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:35:08 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > >>> From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> When CAN_ISOTP_SF_BROADCAST is set in the CAN_ISOTP_OPTS flags the CAN_ISOTP > >>> socket is switched into functional addressing mode, where only single frame > >>> (SF) protocol data units can be send on the specified CAN interface and the > >>> given tp.tx_id after bind(). > >>> > >>> In opposite to normal and extended addressing this socket does not register a > >>> CAN-ID for reception which would be needed for a 1-to-1 ISOTP connection with a > >>> segmented bi-directional data transfer. > >>> > >>> Sending SFs on this socket is therefore a TX-only 'broadcast' operation. > >> > >> Unclear from this patch what is getting fixed. Looks a little bit like > >> a feature which could be added in a backward compatible way, no? > >> Is it only added for completeness of the ISOTP implementation? > >> > > > > Yes, the latter. > > > > It's a very small and simple tested addition and I hope it can still go > > into the initial upstream process. > > What about the (incremental?) change that Thomas Wagner posted? > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201204135557.55599-1-thwa1@xxxxxx That settles it :) This change needs to got into -next and 5.11.
