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;
Date:   Tue, 17 May 2022 19:52:28 +0200
From:   Max Staudt <max@enpas.org>
To:     Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Cc:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
        Vincent MAILHOL <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>,
        linux-can@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] can: skb:: move can_dropped_invalid_skb and
 can_skb_headroom_valid to skb.c
Message-ID: <20220517195228.1cb6ca16.max@enpas.org>
In-Reply-To: <e51a64cd-1130-9c65-2bde-483c63f6aa10@hartkopp.net>
References: <20220513142355.250389-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
        <20220514141650.1109542-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
        <20220514141650.1109542-4-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
        <7b1644ad-c117-881e-a64f-35b8d8b40ef7@hartkopp.net>
        <CAMZ6RqKZMHXB7rQ70GrXcVE7x7kytAAGfE+MOpSgWgWgp0gD2g@mail.gmail.com>
        <20220517060821.akuqbqxro34tj7x6@pengutronix.de>
        <CAMZ6RqJ3sXYUOpw7hEfDzj14H-vXK_i+eYojBk2Lq=h=7cm7Jg@mail.gmail.com>
        <20220517104545.eslountqjppvcnz2@pengutronix.de>
        <e054f6d4-7ed1-98ac-8364-425f4ef0f760@hartkopp.net>
        <20220517141404.578d188a.max@enpas.org>
        <20220517122153.4r6n6kkbdslsa2hv@pengutronix.de>
        <20220517143921.08458f2c.max@enpas.org>
        <0b505b1f-1ee4-5a2c-3bbf-6e9822f78817@hartkopp.net>
        <20220517154301.5bf99ba9.max@enpas.org>
        <22590a57-c7c6-39c6-06d5-11c6e4e1534b@hartkopp.net>
        <20220517173821.445c5e90.max@enpas.org>
        <e51a64cd-1130-9c65-2bde-483c63f6aa10@hartkopp.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 17 May 2022 17:50:03 +0200
Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net> wrote:

> On 17.05.22 17:38, Max Staudt wrote:
> > I'm a bit lost - what would CAN_DEV_SW do?  
> 
> It should be just *one* enabler of building can-dev-ko
> 
> > If it enables can_dropped_invalid_skb(), then the HW drivers would
> > also need to depend on CAN_DEV_SW directly or indirectly, or am I
> > missing something?  
> 
> And CAN_DEV is another enabler that would build the skb stuff from 
> CAN_DEV_SW too (but also the netlink stuff).
> 
> That's what I meant with "some Makefile magic" which is then building 
> the can-dev.ko with the required features depending on CAN_DEV_SW, 
> CAN_DEV, CAN_DEV_RX_OFFLOAD, CAN_CALC_BITTIMING, etc

Ah, I see!
Sounds good :)


Max