qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] CAN bus simple SJA1000 PCI card emulation f


From: Andreas Färber
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] CAN bus simple SJA1000 PCI card emulation for QEMU
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 11:18:09 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0

Am 12.05.2014 11:01, schrieb Peter Crosthwaite:
> On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Pavel Pisa <address@hidden> wrote:
>> The work is based on Jin Yang GSoC 2013 work funded
>> by Google and mentored in frame of RTEMS project GSoC
>> slot donated to QEMU.

Should/can that be recorded in form of his Signed-off-by before yours?

>> Update from QEMU-1.4 version and architecture cleanup
>> by Pavel Pisa (Czech Technical University in Prague).
>>
>> The core SJA1000 support is independent of provided
>> PCI board. The simple core CAN bus infrastructure
>> is independent as well.
>>
>> Connection to the real host CAN bus network through
>> SocketCAN network interface is available for Linux
>> host system as well.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Pisa <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>  default-configs/pci.mak |   2 +
>>  hw/net/Makefile.objs    |   4 +
>>  hw/net/can_core.c       | 350 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  hw/net/can_pci.c        | 238 +++++++++++++
>>  hw/net/can_sja1000.c    | 878 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  hw/net/can_sja1000.h    | 163 +++++++++
>>  include/net/can_emu.h   | 123 +++++++
>>  7 files changed, 1758 insertions(+)
> 
> That's a big patch. And it seems to add a new API/framework, then new
> users of that API. Can you add your core as a single patch, then
> incrementally bring your devices stuff as subsequent patches? My guess
> is this should be about 3 patches - are there any circular deps,
> requiring you to bring your three c files all at once or is there a
> logical order you can add them for ease of review?

True. But before you resend, I'd like to hear Stefan H.'s view of
whether CAN should go into hw/net/ at all or into, e.g., hw/can/.

Independently of the placement, it's always an interesting question of
who will maintain this new infrastructure - I don't see any new
MAINTAINERS entries getting added in either patch (NB: a diffstat in 0/2
would've been nice) for patch review.

Regards,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]