[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1477010559.12570446.1643718624333.JavaMail.zimbra@uliege.be>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 13:30:24 +0100 (CET)
From: Justin Iurman <justin.iurman@...ege.be>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, dsahern@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] uapi: ioam: Insertion frequency
On Jan 31, 2022, at 7:54 PM, Jakub Kicinski kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>> >> + IOAM6_IPTUNNEL_FREQ_K, /* s32 */
>> >> + IOAM6_IPTUNNEL_FREQ_N, /* s32 */
>> >
>> > You can't insert into the middle of a uAPI enum. Binary compatibility.
>>
>> Is it really the middle? I recall adding the "mode" at the top (still
>> below the "_UNSPEC"), which I thought was correct at that time (and had
>> no objection).
>
> Maybe because both changes were made in the same kernel release?
> Not sure.
I just checked. They were both in two different releases, i.e., 5.15 and
5.16. That's weird. It means that the value of IOAM6_IPTUNNEL_TRACE has
changed between 5.15 and 5.16, where it shouldn't have, right? Anyway...
>> That's why I did the same here. Should I move it to the end, then?
>
> You have to move it. I don't see how this patch as is wouldn't change
> the value of IOAM6_IPTUNNEL_MODE.
Indeed. So moving it below IOAM6_IPTUNNEL_TRACE should be fine I guess.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists