From: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol@kernel.org>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>,
linux-can@vger.kernel.org,
Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>,
sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Subject: Re: CAN-XL frame to not CAN-XL enabled interface
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 15:28:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eef5b125-b229-4579-aec5-026755c60132@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <345456c4-907e-4d2f-bb24-4023d2898c94@kernel.org>
On 31/07/2026 at 14:55, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
> On 31/07/2026 at 13:02, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> Vincent,
>>
>> does the current code check if you send a CAN XL frame to a CAN XL
>> enabled interface?
>>
>> On 31.07.2026 10:54:02, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
>>> This is a pre-existing issue, but does this code properly handle CAN XL frames?
>>>
>>> If an ETH_P_CANXL frame is sent via AF_PACKET, can_dev_dropped_skb() currently
>>> lacks a check to drop CAN XL frames for devices that don't support CAN XL.
>>> When such a frame enters rkcanfd_start_xmit(), can_is_canfd_skb() returns
>>> false, causing the driver to treat it as a Classic CAN frame.
>>
>>> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260731-master-v5-0-5b27029dee20@qq.com?part=1
>
> The logic is for checking an ETH_P_CANXL frame is:
>
> - When sending a packet (even with PF_PACKET) the only check which
> is performed is to check that the skb len is not above
> net_device->mtu. So, if the device is not CAN XL capable, anything
> about CANFD_MTU (72 bytes) is dropped.
>
> - In the driver, can_dev_dropped_skb() calls
> can_dropped_invalid_skb() which then call can_is_canxl_skb() which
> validate that the skb length is within the range
>
> [CANXL_HDR_SIZE + CANXL_MIN_DLEN, skb->len > CANXL_MTU]
>
> that is to say 13 and 2060. But we already establish that the
> maximum length is 72 at this time.
>
> So, yes, it seems that an ETH_P_CANXL frame with a length between 13
> and 72 will pass the can_dev_dropped_skb() check. And because
> CANXL_XLF must be set at this point, the driver sees a can_frame->len
> of at least 128 bytes (and up to 255).
>
> Until now, I was convinced in my mind that can_is_canxl_skb() rejected
> frames with a length below CANXL_MIN_MTU which would have prevented
> the issue. And I wrote the implementation under this false assumption
> without double checking.
>
>
> Here is a potential fix:
>
> ---8<---
> diff --git a/include/linux/can/dev.h b/include/linux/can/dev.h
> index 6d0710d6f571..88dec0f91d71 100644
> --- a/include/linux/can/dev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/can/dev.h
> @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ static inline bool can_dev_in_xl_only_mode(struct can_priv *priv)
> /* drop skb if it does not contain a valid CAN frame for sending */
> static inline bool can_dev_dropped_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
> + const struct canxl_frame *cxl = (struct canxl_frame *)skb->data;
> struct can_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> u32 silent_mode = priv->ctrlmode & (CAN_CTRLMODE_LISTENONLY |
> CAN_CTRLMODE_RESTRICTED);
> @@ -167,6 +168,11 @@ static inline bool can_dev_dropped_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *s
> goto invalid_skb;
> }
>
> + if (!(priv->ctrlmode & CAN_CTRLMODE_XL) && cxl->flags & CANXL_XLF) {
> + netdev_info_once(dev, "CAN XL is disabled, dropping skb\n");
> + goto invalid_skb;
> + }
> +
> if (can_dev_in_xl_only_mode(priv) && !can_is_canxl_skb(skb)) {
> netdev_info_once(dev,
> "Error signaling is disabled, dropping skb\n");
> ---8<---
On second thought, maybe this is an even better fix:
---8<---
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/dev/skb.c b/drivers/net/can/dev/skb.c
index 95fcdc1026f8..9846989d4960 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/dev/skb.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/dev/skb.c
@@ -384,7 +384,7 @@ bool can_dropped_invalid_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb)
break;
case ETH_P_CANXL:
- if (!can_is_canxl_skb(skb))
+ if (!can_cap_enabled(dev, CAN_CAP_XL) || !can_is_canxl_skb(skb))
goto inval_skb;
break;
---8<---
> The cxl->flags & CANXL_XLF doesn't catch everything by itself, but
> once we know that this flag is off, can_is_canxl_skb() will reject the
> frame later on. So this should be the minimum fix
> (can_dev_dropped_skb() is an inline function in the hot path, so any
> trick is welcome here, I think).
>
> Does this make sense?
Yours sincerely,
Vincent Mailhol
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-31 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-31 11:02 CAN-XL frame to not CAN-XL enabled interface Marc Kleine-Budde
2026-07-31 12:55 ` Vincent Mailhol
2026-07-31 13:28 ` Vincent Mailhol [this message]
2026-07-31 13:42 ` Oliver Hartkopp
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=eef5b125-b229-4579-aec5-026755c60132@kernel.org \
--to=mailhol@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox