Hi Marc,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 於 2025年2月7日 週五 下午8:15寫道：
>
> > +static irqreturn_t nct6694_can_irq(int irq, void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct net_device *ndev = data;
> > + struct nct6694_can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > + struct nct6694_can_event *evt = priv->event;
> > + struct nct6694_cmd_header cmd_hd = {
> > + .mod = NCT6694_CAN_MOD,
> > + .cmd = NCT6694_CAN_EVENT,
> > + .sel = NCT6694_CAN_EVENT_SEL(priv->can_idx, NCT6694_CAN_EVENT_MASK),
> > + .len = cpu_to_le16(sizeof(priv->event))
> > + };
> > + irqreturn_t handled = IRQ_NONE;
> > + int can_idx = priv->can_idx;
> > + int ret;
>
> it would make sense to have a event pointer here instead of the can_idx?
>
> const struct nct6694_can_event *event = &priv->event[priv->can_idx];
>
The CAN Event command always returns 16bytes: the first 8 bytes
correspond to the CAN0 event, and the last 8 bytes correspond to the
CAN1 event. Therefore, the event pointer here refers to both event
buffers.
Thanks,
Ming
