Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] can: skb:: move can_dropped_invalid_skb and can_skb_headroom_valid to skb.c

From: Max Staudt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 15:43:01 +0200

On Tue, 17 May 2022 15:35:03 +0200
Oliver Hartkopp <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Oh, I didn't want to introduce two new kernel modules but to have 
> can_dev in different 'feature levels'.

Which I agree is a nice idea, as long as heisenbugs can be avoided :)

(as for the separate modules vs. feature levels of can-dev - sorry, my
two paragraphs were each referring to a different idea. I mixed them
into one single email...)

Maybe the can-skb and rx-offload parts could be a *visible* sub-option
of can-dev in Kconfig, which is normally optional, but immediately
force-selected once a CAN HW driver is selected?

> But e.g. the people that are running Linux instances in a cloud only 
> using vcan and vxcan would not need to carry the entire
> infrastructure of CAN hardware support and rx-offload.

Out of curiosity, do you have an example use case for this vcan cloud
setup? I can't dream one up...

Max