On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 23:04:08 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 09.03.2022 22:49:49, Vincent Mailhol wrote: > > Either we agree that using can_rx_offload without implementing > > the mailbox_read() is OK and in that case, the can_rx_offload > > framework should be modified to allow mailbox_read() to be a NULL > > pointer. > > > > Either it is not the case and you use the more classic > > netif_rx(). > > > > And I do not have the answer. I haven't studied can_rx_offload > > enough to be a judge here. Sorry. > > > > @Marc, any thoughts? > > Use can_rx_offload_add_manual() instead. m-( Yes, it's right underneath _add_fifo() and does the right thing. No idea how I missed it, I thought I had looked through all variants. Thanks! > > Also give a look at can_dropped_invalid_skb(). > > ACK Done. > Marc Max
