netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: uapi: Provide an UAPI definition of 'struct sockaddr'

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <06cf1396-c100-45ba-8b46-edb4ed4feb62@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 13:56:38 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
Cc: "Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 "Kuniyuki Iwashima" <kuniyu@...gle.com>, "Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 "Willem de Bruijn" <willemb@...gle.com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: uapi: Provide an UAPI definition of 'struct
 sockaddr'

On Wed, Jan 7, 2026, at 00:13, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 11:32:52 +0100 Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
>> As for the failure in netdev CI however I am not so sure.
>> Looking at net-next-2026-01-05--12-00, the only failures triggered by my
>> change are also the ones from the bpf-ci. Are these the ones you meant,
>> or am I missing some others?
>
> Multiple things broke at once so slightly hard to fish the relevant
> stuff out from here:
>
> https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/contest.html?branch=net-next-2026-01-05--15-00&pass=0&pw-n=0
>
> Here's one:
>
> make[1]: Entering directory 
> '/home/virtme/testing/wt-3/tools/testing/selftests/net'
>   CC       busy_poller
> In file included from [01m[K/usr/include/sys/socket.h:33[m[K,
>                  from [01m[K/usr/include/netinet/in.h:23[m[K,
>                  from [01m[K/usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22[m[K,
>                  from [01m[Kbusy_poller.c:14[m[K:
> [01m[K/usr/include/bits/socket.h:182:8:[m[K [01;31m[Kerror: 
> [m[Kredefinition of '[01m[Kstruct sockaddr[m[K'

>                  from [01m[Kbusy_poller.c:12[m[K:
> [01m[K/home/virtme/testing/wt-3/usr/include/linux/socket.h:37:8:[m[K 
> [01;36m[Knote: [m[Koriginally defined here

Maybe we can change all the instances of 'struct sockaddr' in
include/uapi/ to reference a new 'struct __kernel_sockaddr',
and then redirect that one if the libc header got included
first?

struct __kernel_sockaddr {
       __kernel_sa_family_t    sa_family;      /* address family, AF_xxx       */
       char sa_data_min[14];           /* Minimum 14 bytes of protocol address */
};
#ifdef _SYS_SOCKET_H
#define __kernel_sockaddr sockaddr
#endif

This will still fail when a user application includes linux/if.h
before sys/socket.h and then expects the structures in linux/if.h
to contain the libc version of sockaddr, but hopefully that is
much rarer. A survey of codesearch.debian.net shows almost all
users of linux/if.h first including sys/socket.h, and most of
them not caring about struct sockaddr either.

      Arnd