From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleksij Rempel Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding: do not enslave CAN devices Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:56:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20200313095610.x3iorvdotry54vb4@pengutronix.de> References: <20200302.111249.471862054833131096.davem@davemloft.net> <03ff979e-a621-c9a3-9be3-13677c147f91@pengutronix.de> <20200306.211320.1410615421373955488.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7iofuxgb4mu2cylw" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Marc Kleine-Budde Cc: David Miller , socketcan@hartkopp.net, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, syzbot+c3ea30e1e2485573f953@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, dvyukov@google.com, j.vosburgh@gmail.com, vfalico@gmail.com, andy@greyhouse.net, stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-can.vger.kernel.org --7iofuxgb4mu2cylw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 11:25:50AM +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > On 3/7/20 6:13 AM, David Miller wrote: > > From: Marc Kleine-Budde > > Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 15:12:48 +0100 > >=20 > >> On 3/2/20 8:12 PM, David Miller wrote: > >>> From: Oliver Hartkopp > >>> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 09:45:41 +0100 > >>> > >>>> I don't know yet whether it makes sense to have CAN bonding/team > >>>> devices. But if so we would need some more investigation. For now > >>>> disabling CAN interfaces for bonding/team devices seems to be > >>>> reasonable. > >>> > >>> Every single interesting device that falls into a special use case > >>> like CAN is going to be tempted to add a similar check. > >>> > >>> I don't want to set this precedence. > >>> > >>> Check that the devices you get passed are actually CAN devices, it's > >>> easy, just compare the netdev_ops and make sure they equal the CAN > >>> ones. > >> > >> Sorry, I'm not really sure how to implement this check. > >=20 > > Like this: > >=20 > > if (netdev->ops !=3D &can_netdev_ops) > > return; >=20 > There is no single can_netdev_ops. The netdev_ops are per CAN-network > driver. But the ml_priv is used in the generic CAN code. ping, are there any other ways or ideas how to solve this issue? Regards, Oleksij --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | --7iofuxgb4mu2cylw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEERBNZvwSgvmcMY/T74omh9DUaUbMFAl5rWLYACgkQ4omh9DUa UbM3rRAAlQmb7VoWlMTGLXbsF+xdJwyuJpRNeq/8b499jlIF0wq0u4gidS5EwlLT ZUx/yhRQnYEvT8olNfbKOydG074ZybVRAoKWxqo2WLeTTlK93dSCsSchgGNP4tMb eN2Q/bP0Sfeo0DhRN1G3ddYDvNCBQT+Ix3gsjAPM7UApaWwmpse2m8N3doIJJpLf pXExGT8TDBhyCytnWvogGjjFo2/bRGGZ4niNp7dpG4Ty+HRLl0JNwPJPW+ypPwfu zY0JK9dUqi9Jg3c79g9cCLPD/u7/9a4uFtlEZ8suGzTauhkvEBjM951rU59YZt6d YQeAHvWf5B48n7BCa5yk/kJL+D3iAZhp4Il27w1sdzajmyZaQU3JHygssDjnk+kg t9+Ft2SCfIuRFHwga4EOMlAngOx2hZlLw76t8MRXBckE124+/Jky3AJSPxIG1u8X 9t20xtC2s8S6LYY/oNhhWSUJQYoew9NNVYlvSpRJOK9lt4Ptcc02NhVlEVwIKmMB lLkHLTvGgOAsfkmS39Bi5B+qzYWt5Eu9j+SOsUHnfv5dNhc71Cue2v3pk7wYsAv7 mwyEs0bAUA7cPm2fYPPwLIvZQ0SOnFBsNFxXzSOC5kByf3kIROf5AM+91Rvl5aPE tAe/mFcFUFzCjtxbjj4uInbvPWH+uiwrRaFtI9iltnHiefxHWII= =3Iqy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7iofuxgb4mu2cylw--