Hello Vikram,
thanks much for the patches review.
On Tuesday 01 of September 2020 22:01:26 Vikram Garhwal wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> A couple of comments on this patch.
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 02:20:14PM +0200, p...@cmp.felk.cvut.cz wrote:
> > From: Jan Charvat <charv...@fel.cvut.cz>
> > @@ -185,13 +204,34 @@ static void can_host_socketcan_connect(CanHostState
> > *ch, Error **errp) addr.can_family = AF_CAN;
> > memset(&ifr.ifr_name, 0, sizeof(ifr.ifr_name));
> > strcpy(ifr.ifr_name, c->ifname);
> > + /* check if the frame fits into the CAN netdevice */
> > if (ioctl(s, SIOCGIFINDEX, &ifr) < 0) {
> > error_setg_errno(errp, errno,
> > - "SocketCAN host interface %s not available",
> > c->ifname); + "SocketCAN host interface %s not
> > available", + c->ifname);
>
> May be this formatting change in a different patch? As this is not related
> to CANFD.
> > @@ -232,7 +272,8 @@ static char *can_host_socketcan_get_if(Object *obj,
> > Error **errp) return g_strdup(c->ifname);
> > }
> >
> > -static void can_host_socketcan_set_if(Object *obj, const char *value,
> > Error **errp) +static void can_host_socketcan_set_if(Object *obj, const
> > char *value,
> > + Error **errp)
>
> This one also not relevant change for CANFD. Rest of the patch looks good.
I am responsible for mentioned lines change in net/can/can_socketcan.c.
When I have reviewed patches after Jan Charvat theses submittion,
I have done another bunch of rounds to check that the patches as well
as the whole net/can and hw/net/can are checkpatch clean. I am not sure
if the incorrect formatting sneaked in in my 2018 submission or patcheck
became more strict last years.
I can separate these changes changes into separate patch if required.
By the way, if you or other of your colleagues is willing to participate
in net/can and or hw/net/can patches reviews, I would be happy if you
join my attempt and we can record that we are available to take care
abut these in MAINTAINERS file.
Best wishes,
Pavel
