Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] can: add netlink interface for CAN-FD Transmitter Delay Compensation (TDC)

[Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2450 bytes --]

On 09.03.2021 22:16:45, Vincent MAILHOL wrote:
> On Wed. 24 Feb 2021 at 09:20, Vincent Mailhol
> <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/dev/netlink.c b/drivers/net/can/dev/netlink.c
> > index c19eef775ec8..c3f75c09d6c8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/can/dev/netlink.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/can/dev/netlink.c
> > @@ -19,6 +19,12 @@ static const struct nla_policy can_policy[IFLA_CAN_MAX + 1] = {
> >         [IFLA_CAN_DATA_BITTIMING] = { .len = sizeof(struct can_bittiming) },
> >         [IFLA_CAN_DATA_BITTIMING_CONST] = { .len = sizeof(struct can_bittiming_const) },
> >         [IFLA_CAN_TERMINATION] = { .type = NLA_U16 },
> > +       [IFLA_CAN_TDCV] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > +       [IFLA_CAN_TDCV_MAX_CONST] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > +       [IFLA_CAN_TDCO] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > +       [IFLA_CAN_TDCO_MAX_CONST] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > +       [IFLA_CAN_TDCF] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > +       [IFLA_CAN_TDCF_MAX_CONST] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> >  };
> 
> Looking back at my patch, I just realized that the values are not
> ordered in a consistent way. Here, I alternate between the TDCx
> and the TDCx_CONST...
> 
> > (...)
> 
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/can/netlink.h b/include/uapi/linux/can/netlink.h
> > index f730d443b918..e69c4b330ae6 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/can/netlink.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/can/netlink.h
> > @@ -134,6 +134,12 @@ enum {
> >         IFLA_CAN_BITRATE_CONST,
> >         IFLA_CAN_DATA_BITRATE_CONST,
> >         IFLA_CAN_BITRATE_MAX,
> > +       IFLA_CAN_TDCV,
> > +       IFLA_CAN_TDCO,
> > +       IFLA_CAN_TDCF,
> > +       IFLA_CAN_TDCV_MAX_CONST,
> > +       IFLA_CAN_TDCO_MAX_CONST,
> > +       IFLA_CAN_TDCF_MAX_CONST,
> >         __IFLA_CAN_MAX
> >  };
> 
> ... and there, all the TDCx and the TDCx_CONST are grouped together.
> 
> Marc, because the patches are already in the
> linux-can-next/testing, how should I proceed to fix this? Should
> I resend the full patch series with the changes or can I just
> prepare one patch and ask you to squash it?

Please send an incremental patch and I'll squash it.

Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Vertretung West/Dortmund         | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]