On 7/22/15, 1:17 PM, Thomas Graf wrote:
On 07/22/15 at 01:04pm, David Miller wrote:
From: Thomas Graf <tg...@suug.ch>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 21:57:06 +0200
On 07/22/15 at 12:30pm, roopa wrote:
diff --git a/net/mpls/Kconfig b/net/mpls/Kconfig
index 5c467ef..2b28615 100644
--- a/net/mpls/Kconfig
+++ b/net/mpls/Kconfig
@@ -24,6 +24,8 @@ config NET_MPLS_GSO
config MPLS_ROUTING
tristate "MPLS: routing support"
+ depends on INET
+ depends on IPV6
---help---
Add support for forwarding of mpls packets.
This looks like a much better fix to me and resolves the
module/built-in dependency mess.
It's only OK if we don't create a new hard dependency on IPV6,
which this patch does.
Consitently across the tree we give the user the option of
using a bi-AF facility with or without IPV6.
OK. I guess there is an MPLS routing use case which does not
depend on INET or IPV6 if all routes specify an RTA_OIF. Not
enough of an expert to know if that is the common case or not.
yes, there is ie., the kernel supports it. though we have never used it
nor plan to. Not sure about the use case.
Otherwise I would have argued to start dropping the special status
for IPv6 and start treating IP dependency as a combination of both
to promote it further/faster. It can still be explicitly disabled.
Then again, I might be too optimistic in assuming that this will
be the year of IPv6 ;-)
:).
I cant think of a way to fix the current problem with my patch....ie,
when CONFIG_IPV6=m and my module does not have a hard dependency on
CONFIG_IPV6.
If there are suggestions, pls let me know (I am ok with a revert until
there is a solution).
I do see ip6_route_output used from several modules, they all quite
likely have a hard dependency on CONFIG_IPV6.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
