netdev - Re: [net-next] can: raw: fix build without CONFIG_CAN

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9b9d6d81-be16-4cbd-b691-6a7b16d85c4e@hartkopp.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:24:59 +0100
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc: linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
 kuba@...nel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de, Vincent Mailhol <mailhol@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next] can: raw: fix build without CONFIG_CAN_DEV

Answering myself:

You were right (raw.c built-in, drivers as modules):

ld: net/can/raw.o: in function `raw_check_txframe':
/home/hartko/linux/net/can/raw.c:933:(.text+0xb2c): undefined reference 
to `safe_candev_priv'
make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.vmlinux:72: vmlinux.unstripped] Error 1
make[1]: *** [/home/hartko/linux/Makefile:1242: vmlinux] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:248: __sub-make] Error 2

Maybe its a better task for tomorrow ...

Sorry for the noise.

Best regards,
Oliver

On 28.11.25 00:03, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> Hello Marc,
> 
> On 27.11.25 23:43, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> On 27.11.2025 23:35:48, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
>>>> That's not sufficient. We can build the CAN_DEV as a module but compile
>>>> CAN_RAW into the kernel.
>>
>>> Oh, yes that's better.
>>
>> It's nicer, but it will not work if you build CAN_RAW into the kernel
>> and CAN_DEV as a module....Let me think of the right kconfig magic to
>> workaround this...
> 
> No need for it IMO.
> 
> I built my kernel with the CAN netlayer stuff into the kernel and 
> disabled the CAN_DEV stuff.
> 
> As you defined
> 
> static inline struct can_priv *safe_candev_priv(struct net_device *dev) {
>      return NULL;
> }
> 
> in
> 
> include/linux/can/dev.h
> 
> this function is now inside raw.c which compiles excellent.
> 
> Building without CONFIG_CAN_DEV is not a valid use-case anyway.
> 
> It would only make sense, if someone wants to create an out-of-tree CAN 
> driver without netlink ...
> 
> Best regards,
> Oliver
> 
>