problems on CAN bitrate
 

On 05/30/2011 05:04 AM, wadjet wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I don't know where to go with my specific kernel-configuration problem,
>
> I'm using ubuntu 11.04 with a CAN network, but couldn't use my
> interfaces anymore after the upgrade to 11.04.
>
> Help of a colleague Kurt van Dijck (active in CAN integration in the
> kernel) showed the bittiming calculation was not compiled into this
> kernel 2.6.38.
>
> CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMING=n
>
> He had to recompile the kernel to activate this.
>
> Is it possible to include this bittiming on new releases of the kernel?
>
> Regards,
>
> Walter Verbruggen

cc'd the kernel-team mailing list as this is the best place to ask these
type of questions so there can be a full discussion.

Thanks

~pete
--
Pete Graner <pgraner@canonical.com>
Manager +1.828.358.0068 Office
Ubuntu Kernel Team +1.828.582.9466 Mobile
Canonical Ltd. http://www.canonical.com/

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

problems on CAN bitrate
 

On 30.05.2011 14:25, Pete Graner wrote:

On 05/30/2011 05:04 AM, wadjet wrote:

Hello,

I don't know where to go with my specific kernel-configuration problem,

I'm using ubuntu 11.04 with a CAN network, but couldn't use my
interfaces anymore after the upgrade to 11.04.

Help of a colleague Kurt van Dijck (active in CAN integration in the
kernel) showed the bittiming calculation was not compiled into this
kernel 2.6.38.

CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMING=n

He had to recompile the kernel to activate this.

Is it possible to include this bittiming on new releases of the kernel?

Regards,

Walter Verbruggen


cc'd the kernel-team mailing list as this is the best place to ask these
type of questions so there can be a full discussion.

Thanks

~pete


This seems to be only affecting the can driver itself and is default y and does
not seem to be experimental at a glance. So it should be fairly safe. But I
wonder from where the upgrade was made as this seems to have been introduced in
2.6.31 and ever since then been not set in our config.


-Stefan

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

problems on CAN bitrate
 

On 30.05.2011 15:27, Stefan Bader wrote:
> On 30.05.2011 14:25, Pete Graner wrote:
>> On 05/30/2011 05:04 AM, wadjet wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I don't know where to go with my specific kernel-configuration problem,
>>>
>>> I'm using ubuntu 11.04 with a CAN network, but couldn't use my
>>> interfaces anymore after the upgrade to 11.04.
>>>
>>> Help of a colleague Kurt van Dijck (active in CAN integration in the
>>> kernel) showed the bittiming calculation was not compiled into this
>>> kernel 2.6.38.
>>>
>>> CONFIG_CAN_CALC_BITTIMING=n
>>>
>>> He had to recompile the kernel to activate this.
>>>
>>> Is it possible to include this bittiming on new releases of the kernel?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Walter Verbruggen
>>
>> cc'd the kernel-team mailing list as this is the best place to ask these
>> type of questions so there can be a full discussion.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> ~pete
>
> This seems to be only affecting the can driver itself and is default y and does
> not seem to be experimental at a glance. So it should be fairly safe. But I
> wonder from where the upgrade was made as this seems to have been introduced in
> 2.6.31 and ever since then been not set in our config.
>
> -Stefan
>
Trying to push up the thread. Ok, there was not really feedback by the guy. But
maybe it is a riskless enough thing. At least for Oneiric, which still has it
not set.

-Stefan

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

problems on CAN bitrate
 

On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 07:17:48PM +0200, Stefan Bader wrote:

> > This seems to be only affecting the can driver itself and is default y and does
> > not seem to be experimental at a glance. So it should be fairly safe. But I
> > wonder from where the upgrade was made as this seems to have been introduced in
> > 2.6.31 and ever since then been not set in our config.
> >
> > -Stefan
> >
> Trying to push up the thread. Ok, there was not really feedback by the guy. But
> maybe it is a riskless enough thing. At least for Oneiric, which still has it
> not set.

Looking at the option it seems to be reasonable to be enabled. With it
enabled you seem to get both automatic and manual configuration options.
Policy would also normally indicate to enable it. This options effect is
clearly self contained to this network protocol.

Therefore, I have pushed a config change to Oneiric to enable this.
It would be good to get this tested once it hits the archive.

-apw

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team