On older kernels, e.g. 2.6.27, a WARN_ON dump in rtmsg_ifinfo()
is thrown when the CAN device is registered due to insufficient
skb space, as reported by various users. This patch adds the
rtnl_link_ops "get_size" to fix the problem. I think this patch
is required for more recent kernels as well, even if no WARN_ON
dumps are triggered. Maybe we also need "get_xstats_size" for
the CAN xstats.

Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]>

---
 drivers/net/can/dev.c |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)

Index: net-next-2.6/drivers/net/can/dev.c
===================================================================
--- net-next-2.6.orig/drivers/net/can/dev.c
+++ net-next-2.6/drivers/net/can/dev.c
@@ -637,6 +637,22 @@ static int can_changelink(struct net_dev
        return 0;
 }
 
+static size_t can_get_size(const struct net_device *dev)
+{
+       struct can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
+       size_t size;
+
+       size = nla_total_size(sizeof(u32));   /* IFLA_CAN_STATE */
+       size += sizeof(struct can_ctrlmode);  /* IFLA_CAN_CTRLMODE */
+       size += nla_total_size(sizeof(u32));  /* IFLA_CAN_RESTART_MS */
+       size += sizeof(struct can_bittiming); /* IFLA_CAN_BITTIMING */
+       size += sizeof(struct can_clock);     /* IFLA_CAN_CLOCK */
+       if (priv->bittiming_const)            /* IFLA_CAN_BITTIMING_CONST */
+               size += sizeof(struct can_bittiming_const);
+
+       return size;
+}
+
 static int can_fill_info(struct sk_buff *skb, const struct net_device *dev)
 {
        struct can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
@@ -687,6 +703,7 @@ static struct rtnl_link_ops can_link_ops
        .setup          = can_setup,
        .newlink        = can_newlink,
        .changelink     = can_changelink,
+       .get_size       = can_get_size,
        .fill_info      = can_fill_info,
        .fill_xstats    = can_fill_xstats,
 };
_______________________________________________
Socketcan-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core

Reply via email to