From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Cc: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>,
ltp@lists.linux.it, linux-can@vger.kernel.org,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] can: Add can_common.h for vcan device setup
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 13:13:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YBFY7w1vseKSA4Df@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87im7i94iu.fsf@suse.de>
Hi Richie,
<snip>
> >>>> IFF_ECHO was included into Linux 2.6.25 together with the CAN
> >>>> subsystem itself.
> >>>> So when you run the tests on Kernels < 2.6.25 you don't have CAN
> >>>> support and don't need IFF_ECHO too.
> >>> Petr, what kernel version and/or distro version did compilation fail on?
> >>> There is a small chance someone might be compiling with old kernel
> >>> headers relative to their kernel. However it is a challenge to compile
> >>> LTP with such an old user land.
> >> No, we don't support 2.6.25 :). I was playing with Buildroot distro
> >> in my spare time.
> >> These embedded toolchains suffer compatibility problems (usually uclibc-ng and
> >> sometimes musl lack the support). This problem was when using sourcery-arm-*.
> > :-/
> >> But this is definitely not a blocker for this patchset. That lapi is not a must,
> >> I can fix it some time later. I usually fix few of these problems before each
> >> LTP release.
> > Ok. No problem. I wasn't aware that e.g. musl or other toolchains
> > select such strange starting points for their include files.
> I wonder Petr, is it still necessary to define IFF_ECHO now only
> <linux/if.h> is included? Or do they somehow symlink linux/if.h ->
> net/if.h?
No.
> Indeed it seems the current version of uclibc-ng doesn't include
> IFF_ECHO in <net/if.h>. OTOH musl does define it.
Yes => please keep that definition in can_common.h (enough here, we don't have
to bother with if.h when we don't have it yet).
And I'll send tonight patch to uclibc-ng.
The more mature musl is the less relevant uclibc-ng is.
Kind regards,
Petr
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v3 2/7] can: Add can_common.h for vcan device setup
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 13:13:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YBFY7w1vseKSA4Df@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87im7i94iu.fsf@suse.de>
Hi Richie,
<snip>
> >>>> IFF_ECHO was included into Linux 2.6.25 together with the CAN
> >>>> subsystem itself.
> >>>> So when you run the tests on Kernels < 2.6.25 you don't have CAN
> >>>> support and don't need IFF_ECHO too.
> >>> Petr, what kernel version and/or distro version did compilation fail on?
> >>> There is a small chance someone might be compiling with old kernel
> >>> headers relative to their kernel. However it is a challenge to compile
> >>> LTP with such an old user land.
> >> No, we don't support 2.6.25 :). I was playing with Buildroot distro
> >> in my spare time.
> >> These embedded toolchains suffer compatibility problems (usually uclibc-ng and
> >> sometimes musl lack the support). This problem was when using sourcery-arm-*.
> > :-/
> >> But this is definitely not a blocker for this patchset. That lapi is not a must,
> >> I can fix it some time later. I usually fix few of these problems before each
> >> LTP release.
> > Ok. No problem. I wasn't aware that e.g. musl or other toolchains
> > select such strange starting points for their include files.
> I wonder Petr, is it still necessary to define IFF_ECHO now only
> <linux/if.h> is included? Or do they somehow symlink linux/if.h ->
> net/if.h?
No.
> Indeed it seems the current version of uclibc-ng doesn't include
> IFF_ECHO in <net/if.h>. OTOH musl does define it.
Yes => please keep that definition in can_common.h (enough here, we don't have
to bother with if.h when we don't have it yet).
And I'll send tonight patch to uclibc-ng.
The more mature musl is the less relevant uclibc-ng is.
Kind regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-27 12:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-20 14:37 [PATCH v3 0/7] Convert CAN tests to new LTP API Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] API: Add FILE_SCANF to new lib Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] can: Add can_common.h for vcan device setup Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-25 10:20 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2021-01-25 10:20 ` [LTP] " Oliver Hartkopp
2021-01-25 10:59 ` Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-25 10:59 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-26 21:28 ` Petr Vorel
2021-01-26 21:28 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2021-01-27 7:52 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2021-01-27 7:52 ` [LTP] " Oliver Hartkopp
2021-01-27 8:18 ` Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-27 8:18 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-27 12:13 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2021-01-27 12:13 ` Petr Vorel
2021-01-27 15:07 ` Petr Vorel
2021-01-27 15:07 ` Petr Vorel
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] can: Add COPYING with dual license text Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] can_filter: Convert to new library Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] can_recv_own_msgs: " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-25 14:29 ` Cyril Hrubis
2021-01-25 14:29 ` Cyril Hrubis
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] can: Remove obsolete test wrapper script Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-25 9:10 ` Petr Vorel
2021-01-25 9:10 ` Petr Vorel
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] can: Update contact details Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-20 14:37 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-01-25 10:25 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2021-01-25 10:25 ` [LTP] " Oliver Hartkopp
2021-01-25 14:30 ` Cyril Hrubis
2021-01-25 14:30 ` Cyril Hrubis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YBFY7w1vseKSA4Df@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=rpalethorpe@suse.de \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.