[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260203122715-eeb304f9-4b42-4fc6-a527-658182a92ba5@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 12:42:22 +0100
From: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@...nel.org>, Mat Martineau <martineau@...nel.org>,
Geliang Tang <geliang@...nel.org>, Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
Günther Noack <gnoack@...gle.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
mptcp@...ts.linux.dev, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
libc-alpha@...rceware.org, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>,
Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, klibc@...or.com,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] net: uapi: Provide an UAPI definition of
'struct sockaddr'
On Sat, Jan 31, 2026 at 09:25:17AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 11:26:32 +0100 Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > Jan 30, 2026 17:17:46 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>:
> >
> > > On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 11:34:15 +0100 Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > >> Some of them get broken by the new 'struct sockaddr', but some others are
> > >> already broken just by the new transitive inclusion of libc-compat.h.
> > >> So any header starting to use the compatibility machinery may trigger breakage
> > >> in code including UAPI headers before libc header, even for completely new type
> > >> definitions which themselves would not conflict with libc.
> > >
> > > Let's split the uAPI header changes from any selftest changes.
> > > If you're saying the the selftests no longer build after the uAPI
> > > header changes then of course we can't apply the patches.
> >
> > Yes, the selftests don't build anymore after the uAPI changes.
> >
> > "can't apply" as in
> > * "can't apply separately"
> > * "are unacceptable in general"
>
> this one
>
> > * "are too late for this cycle"
> > ?
> >
> > None of this is urgent.
> > We can do the selftests in one cycle and the uAPI in another one.
> > Feel free to pick up the patches as you see fit.
> > (The mptcp changes already go through their tree, so need to be dropped here)
> > I can also resubmit the patches differently if preferred.
>
> The selftests are just a canary in the coalmine. If we break a bunch of
> selftests chances are we'll also break compilation of real applications
> for people. Subjective, but I don't see a sufficient upside here to do
> that.
Okay. We'll have around this inconsistency then.
> FWIW the typelimits change broke compilation of ethtool, we'll see if
> anyone "outside kernel community itself" complains.
Can you point me to that breakage? I was unable to find it.
Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists