On 05.08.2021 22:19:00, Dario Binacchi wrote:

As reported by a comment in the c_can_start_xmit() this was not a FIFO.
C/D_CAN controller sends out the buffers prioritized so that the lowest
buffer number wins.

What did c_can_start_xmit() do if head was less tail in the tx ring ? It
waited until all the frames queued in the FIFO was actually transmitted
by the controller before accepting a new CAN frame to transmit, even if
the FIFO was not full, to ensure that the messages were transmitted in
the order in which they were loaded.

By storing the frames in the FIFO without requiring its transmission, we
will be able to use the full size of the FIFO even in cases such as the
one described above. The transmission interrupt will trigger their
transmission only when all the messages previously loaded but stored in
less priority positions of the buffers have been transmitted.

Suggested-by: Gianluca Falavigna <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Dario Binacchi <redacted>

My review from
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20210806092523.hij5ejjq6wecbgfr@pengutronix.de/ (local)
applies here, too.

Please use IF_RX in c_can_do_tx(), remove the spin_lock and test. After
applying your series, I'll send a patch that changes IF_RX into IF_NAPI
to avoid any further confusion.

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Vertretung West/Dortmund         | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |