On 17.05.2022 14:14:04, Max Staudt wrote:
> > After looking through drivers/net/can/Kconfig I would probably phrase
> > it like this:
> > 
> > Select CAN devices (hw/sw) -> we compile a can_dev module. E.g. to 
> > handle the skb stuff for vcan's.
> > 
> > Select hardware CAN devices -> we compile the netlink stuff into
> > can_dev and offer CAN_CALC_BITTIMING and CAN_LEDS to be compiled into
> > can_dev too.
> > 
> > In the latter case: The selection of flexcan, ti_hecc and mcp251xfd 
> > automatically selects CAN_RX_OFFLOAD which is then also compiled into 
> > can_dev.
> > 
> > Would that fit in terms of complexity?
> 
> IMHO these should always be compiled into can-dev. Out of tree drivers
> are fairly common here, and having to determine which kind of can-dev
> (stripped or not) the user has on their system is a nightmare waiting to
> happen.

I personally don't care about out-of-tree drivers.

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 |