David Miller wrote: > From: Oliver Hartkopp <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:19:21 +0100 > >> static netdev_tx_t vcan_tx(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev) >> { >> + struct can_frame *cf = (struct can_frame *)skb->data; >> struct net_device_stats *stats = &dev->stats; >> int loop; >> >> + if (unlikely(skb->len != sizeof(*cf) || cf->can_dlc > 8)) { >> + kfree_skb(skb); >> + stats->tx_dropped++; >> + return NETDEV_TX_OK; >> + } >> + > ... >> +/* Drop a given socketbuffer if it does not contain a valid CAN frame. */ >> +static inline int can_dropped_invalid_skb(struct net_device *dev, >> + struct sk_buff *skb) >> +{ >> + const struct can_frame *cf = (struct can_frame *)skb->data; >> + >> + if (unlikely(skb->len != sizeof(*cf) || cf->can_dlc > 8)) { >> + kfree_skb(skb); >> + dev->stats.tx_dropped++; >> + return 1; >> + } >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> struct net_device *alloc_candev(int sizeof_priv, unsigned int echo_skb_max); > > Why are you not using the new helper function in vcan_tx()?
I just wanted the vcan driver keep off including "include/linux/can/dev.h" which is intended for 'real' CAN hardware. As the vcan software devices do not need the bitrate-setting and skb echo handling from the driver library for real CAN devices, this inline function would be the only reason to include ".../dev.h" But i don't have a strong preference to do it like this. Do you think i should change it to used the defined inline function? Regards, Oliver _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
