Answering myself:

I discovered a problem with the patch in 2.6.30-stable, see:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=125978891705230&w=2

Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> Matthias Fuchs wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> what happened to this?
>>
>> I observed this behavior with Socket-CAN SVN r1091 on 2.6.30 kernels.
> 
> Hi Matthias,
> 
> this problem is *not* inside SocketCAN aka /linux/net/can/* ...
> 
> It's inside the surrounding networking infrastructure.
> 
> It has been fixed here:
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/28993/
> 
> Committed to Mainline Linux here (for 2.6.31)
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=d55d87fdff8252d0e2f7c28c2d443aee17e9d70f
> 
> Committed for 2.6.30-stable here (should be ok in 2.6.30.5)
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.30.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=172570a224fe66d560c097e48fca15b620c76e72
> 
> So if you upgrade to 2.6.30.5 it should work as the problem is only between
> 2.6.30 and 2.6.30.4 .
> 
> Does that info help you?
> 
> Regards,
> Oliver
> 
>> On Saturday 20 June 2009 14:42, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
>>> Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
>>>> Michel Marti wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I recently updated my Kernel from 2.6.26 to 2.6.30 and since then, CAN 
>>>>> frames sent over
>>>>> the virtual CAN device (vcan) get looped back to the sender of the frame, 
>>>>> as if the
>>>>> CAN_RAW_RECV_OWN_MSGS socket option was enabled (it isn't). Socketcan 
>>>>> from SVN-trunk shows
>>>>> the same behaviour... Am I missing something or is this a bug?
>>>> I'll take a look at it.
>>>>
>>>> Stay tuned :-)
>>> Hi Michel,
>>>
>>> the needed sk reference for omitting the own received messages is killed by 
>>> a
>>> new skb_orphan() call in net/core/dev.c introduced in
>>>
>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.30.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=9a279bcbe347496799711155ed41a89bc40f79c5
>>>
>>> So it first occurs in 2.6.30.
>>>
>>> Thanks for pointing me to this issue!
>>>
>>> I'll try to get some feedback from Herbert Xu about this and how we can 
>>> solve
>>> these kinds of problems in the future.
>>>
>>> Additionally i'll create some test-application for LTP to be sure that 
>>> kernel
>>> changes do not kill established CAN functionalities.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Oliver
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Socketcan-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
>>>
>>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Socketcan-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users

_______________________________________________
Socketcan-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users

Reply via email to