From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux•org>
To: Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli@iki•fi>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@virtuozzo•com>
Subject: Re: uapi: MAX_ADDR_LEN vs. numeric 32
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2017 01:25:19 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170804222519.GA11085@altlinux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170804213325.GC28459@lakka.kapsi.fi>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1949 bytes --]
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 <ldv@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
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-04 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-04 21:33 uapi: MAX_ADDR_LEN vs. numeric 32 Mikko Rapeli
2017-08-04 22:25 ` Dmitry V. Levin [this message]
2017-08-04 22:34 ` Mikko Rapeli
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=20170804222519.GA11085@altlinux.org \
--to=ldv@altlinux$(echo .)org \
--cc=mikko.rapeli@iki$(echo .)fi \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=xemul@virtuozzo$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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