Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230507155506.3179711-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
 <20230508-sprint-cause-80b4172d5a5a-mkl@pengutronix.de> <CAMZ6RqKQw702HPjBTNJdBfL8yhkn5vDVDfn6dbrVMv7SX6NO2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <BL3PR11MB64841417866BA13DFEA3E373FB769@BL3PR11MB6484.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BL3PR11MB64841417866BA13DFEA3E373FB769@BL3PR11MB6484.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From:   Vincent MAILHOL <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Date:   Tue, 9 May 2023 17:06:43 +0900
Message-ID: <CAMZ6Rq+DW7Vdrjb+T2FVkh4iCFAGWQSUTpCAuFCsH_TJ-NYjTg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: length: add definitions for frame lengths in bits
To:     Thomas.Kopp@microchip.com
Cc:     mkl@pengutronix.de, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, marex@denx.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Thomas,

On Mon. 9 May 2023 at 16:12, <Thomas.Kopp@microchip.com> wrote:

[...]

> Right, do you plan on separating this for Arbitration bitrate and databitrate? It would probably make sense to use a fixed number of worst case stuffbits for the arbitration phase and the formula for the data phase.

I have a few ideas how to implement it, but seeing how complex things
are going, I am thinking of creating an inline helper function for the
bitstuffing calculation (the compiler should be able to fold it into a
constant expression, so there should be no penalty).

For the exact details, I have not decided yet. I need to experiment.
This not being so trivial and not having so much free time now, please
wait a few days for the v2 ;)