plc4x-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject Re: Socketcan transport
Date Tue, 01 Sep 2020 11:00:46 GMT
Hi Lukasz,

I strongly agree that you should donate to that project what you have.

After all we all benefit from it. 

Till that's released however I think we'll keep a copy here and use that.

Thanks for your work on this ... I know CAN has been asked for quite regularly as it seems
especially in CNC area this is used a lot.

Chris


Am 01.09.20, 11:55 schrieb "Łukasz Dywicki" <luke@code-house.org>:

    Hey folks,
    I wanted to let you know that socket can stuff which I implemented in
    very raw form on top of JavaCAN is working. I been asked by library
    author to make it a part of next release of his library. I am fine with
    that, but before I will move code anywhere I wanted to check what's your
    thinking in this area.

    There is already an issue in JavaCAN about netty support:
    https://github.com/pschichtel/JavaCAN/issues/20
    This issue aims use of netty epoll together with linux epoll on top of
    socketcan to implement non-blocking pipelines. If it eventually comes to
    this project we'll benefit a lot in high performance scenarios (can fd)
    and these where time is important.

    My personal perception is that moving what I did to javacan-netty will
    let more people utilize this integration and probably improve its
    quality over time. If we will hold what I did in house we will block
    eventual evolution of this part. After move we will still need dedicated
    plc4x-socketcan transport, however its role will be mainly to map URI
    parameters to javacan options (which we don't ATM).

    Let me know what you think.

    Kind regards,
    Łukasz

Mime
View raw message