Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-152366-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <94638dbd-4768-4110-b85f-f158ced21ba0@hartkopp.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 21:51:41 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Documentation: networking: document ISO
 15765-2:2016
To: Vincent Mailhol <vincent.mailhol@gmail.com>
Cc: Francesco Valla <valla.francesco@gmail.com>,
 Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>, linux-can@vger.kernel.org,
 netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>, Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>,
 fabio@redaril.me
References: <20240329133458.323041-2-valla.francesco@gmail.com>
 <20240329133458.323041-3-valla.francesco@gmail.com>
 <CAMZ6RqKLaYb+8EaeoFMHofcaBT5G2-qdqSb4do73xrgMvWMZaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9f5ad308-f2a0-47be-85f3-d152bc98099a@hartkopp.net>
 <CAMZ6RqKGKcYd4hAM8AVV72t78H-Kt92NXowx6Q+YCw=AuSxKuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <64586257-3cf6-4c10-a30b-200b1ecc5e80@hartkopp.net> <Zh6qiDwbEnaJtTvl@fedora>
 <d4a55991-0ccc-4e8f-8acb-56077600c9e0@hartkopp.net>
 <CAMZ6RqJUHJdq30CrAzT26_RqpDOH_iMP8A6SKSAYrWBe-T+Oww@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAMZ6RqJUHJdq30CrAzT26_RqpDOH_iMP8A6SKSAYrWBe-T+Oww@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 17.04.24 17:21, Vincent Mailhol wrote:

> If we bump the version to :2024, then I suggest to:
> 
>    - add a first patch in this series to update Kconfig.
>    - add your documentation as a second patch directly with the :2024 version.
> 

Ok.

> I can also use ISO 11898-1 as an example. Our documentation says that
> we support ISO 11898-1:2015. The previous version: ISO 11898-1:2003 is
> not mentioned a single time in the full kernel tree. Yet, I do not
> think that any one was ever confused that the kernel may not be
> compatible with ISO 11898-1:2003.
> 
> If you really think that there is a risk of confusion, then maybe just
> adding a sentence to say that we support ISO 15765-2:2024 and all
> previous versions would be enough?
> 
> But overall, I do not see the benefit to keep the older version.

We currently have different occurrences of the 15765-2 term:

$ git grep "15765-2"
include/uapi/linux/can.h:#define CAN_ISOTP      6 /* ISO 15765-2 
Transport Protocol */
include/uapi/linux/can/isotp.h: * Definitions for isotp CAN sockets (ISO 
15765-2:2016)
net/can/Kconfig:        tristate "ISO 15765-2:2016 CAN transport protocol"
net/can/Kconfig:          ISO 15765-2:2016 for 'classic' CAN and CAN FD 
frame types.
net/can/isotp.c:/* isotp.c - ISO 15765-2 CAN transport protocol for 
protocol family CAN
net/can/isotp.c:MODULE_DESCRIPTION("PF_CAN isotp 15765-2:2016 protocol");
net/can/isotp.c:/* ISO 15765-2:2016 supports more than 4095 byte per ISO 
PDU as the FF_DL can
net/can/isotp.c:/* maximum PDU size before ISO 15765-2:2016 extension 
was 4095 */

I've sent a patch to remove the ISO 15675-2 specification version/date 
where possible:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20240420194746.4885-1-socketcan@hartkopp.net/T/#u

This also makes clear where the ISO 15765-2:2016 remains helpful IMHO.

I would be fine to remove the version/date in the documentation from 
Francesco where possible too.

Best regards,
Oliver