[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260131092517.6639d84c@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 09:25:17 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: 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>, "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, 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.
FWIW the typelimits change broke compilation of ethtool, we'll see if
anyone "outside kernel community itself" complains.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists