On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 3:12 PM Marc Kleine-Budde mkl@pengutronix.de wrote:
On 3/2/20 8:12 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Oliver Hartkopp socketcan@hartkopp.net 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.
Should I maintain a list of all netdev_ops of all the CAN devices (= whitelist) and the compare against that list? Having a global list of pointers to network devices remind me of the old days of kernel-2.4.
I think Dave means something like this:
$ grep "netdev_ops == " drivers/net/*/*.c net/*/*.c drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c: if (event_dev->netdev_ops == &device_ops) drivers/net/ppp/ppp_generic.c: if (dev->netdev_ops == &ppp_netdev_ops) net/dsa/slave.c: return dev->netdev_ops == &dsa_slave_netdev_ops; net/openvswitch/vport-internal_dev.c: return netdev->netdev_ops == &internal_dev_netdev_ops;