Hi, On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 12:33:25AM +0300, Mikko Rapeli wrote: > First, thanks Dmitry for fixing several uapi compilation problems in > user space. I got a bit demotivated
That's quite understandable.
> about the slow review progress, e.g.
> no feedback what so ever, on some of the patches, but lets try again...
>
> I rebased my tree now and saw
>
> commit 745cb7f8a5de0805cade3de3991b7a95317c7c73
> Author: Dmitry V. Levin <l...@altlinux.org>
> Date: Tue Mar 7 23:50:50 2017 +0300
>
> uapi: fix linux/packet_diag.h userspace compilation error
>
> which does:
>
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/packet_diag.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/packet_diag.h
> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ struct packet_diag_mclist {
> __u32 pdmc_count;
> __u16 pdmc_type;
> __u16 pdmc_alen;
> - __u8 pdmc_addr[MAX_ADDR_LEN];
> + __u8 pdmc_addr[32]; /* MAX_ADDR_LEN */
> };
>
> struct packet_diag_ring {
>
> In my tree I had fixed that case with:
>
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/packet_diag.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/packet_diag.h
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
> #define __PACKET_DIAG_H__
>
> #include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/netdevice.h>
>
> struct packet_diag_req {
> __u8 sdiag_family;
>
> since netdevice.h has the definition also in user space
>
> #define MAX_ADDR_LEN 32 /* Largest hardware address length */
>
> I find using MAX_ADDR_LEN better than numeric 32, though I doubt this will
> change any time soon. Would you mind if I change packet_diag.h and
> if_link.h to use that instead and fix the userspace compilation
> problems by including netdevice.h?
The alternative fix, that is, to include <linux/netdevice.h>
which pulls in other headers and a lot of definitions with them,
has been mentioned in the discussion, too.
We decided that the fix that was applied would be the least of all evils.
--
ldv
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
