[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211006214816.GA11000@altlinux.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2021 00:48:16 +0300
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To: Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc: Eugene Syromyatnikov <evgsyr@...il.com>,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: strace build error static assertion failed: "XFRM_MSG_MAPPING !=
0x26"
On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 09:43:11PM +0000, Chris Packham wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When compiling strace-5.14 (although it looks like the same problem
> would exist with bleeding edge strace) with headers from the tip of
> Linus's tree (5.15.0-rc4) I get the following error
>
> strace: In file included from static_assert.h:11,
> strace: from print_fields.h:12,
> strace: from defs.h:1901,
> strace: from netlink.c:10:
> strace: xlat/nl_xfrm_types.h:162:1: error: static assertion failed:
> "XFRM_MSG_MAPPING != 0x26"
> strace: static_assert((XFRM_MSG_MAPPING) == (0x26), "XFRM_MSG_MAPPING
> != 0x26");
> strace: ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> It looks like commit 2d151d39073a ("xfrm: Add possibility to set the
> default to block if we have no policy") added some XFRM messages and the
> numbers shifted. Is this considered an ABI breakage?
>
> I'm not sure if this is a strace problem or a linux problem so I'm
> reporting it in both places.
Yes, this is already covered by
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210912122234.GA22469@asgard.redhat.com/T/#u
Thanks,
--
ldv
Powered by blists - more mailing lists