On Sun. 1 Dec. 2024 at 20:38, Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > I found some issues in the code and fixed up the problems below. > > The funniest thing was this copy/paste problem in netlink.h ;-) > (see attached patch with my changes) > > The patch descriptions are not finalized - but it becomes usable now. > I will add the CAN XL transceiver switch to the controlmode definitions. > > For the PWM configuration we would need some more discussions. > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20241201112333.6950-1-socketcan@xxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20241201112230.6917-1-socketcan@xxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t > > Best regards, > Oliver Hi Oliver, Thanks for all the testing and the fixes. Because of the lack of testing of this RFC on my side, I was expecting such issues. But I really appreciate that you took time to investigate and debug, really helpful! I will make sure to incorporate these fixes in the next version. On my side, the last three weeks were more busy than anticipated but I finally found some time to do a deep dive in ISO 11898-1:2024, I read two thirds of it so far, just a few more pages to go. It just takes me time to digest all the information. Once this is done, things should be more straightforward. The next series I send will add the pwm and drop the RFC patch. My goal is to have this CAN XL series ready for inclusion in linux 6.14. I don't want to overcommit, but hopefully, I would like to send the v1 either this weekend or next weekend. I will also rethink whether or not is it worth doing some NLA nesting as suggested by Marc here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20241112-flashy-straight-poodle-9a796d-mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ (I am still divided on this subject). Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol
