if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use

if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use

[Thomas Backlund]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 879 bytes --]

patch both inline and attached as thunderbird tends to mess up ...
-----

if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h header.

Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.

Reported-by: Colin Guthrie <colin@mageia.org>
Reported-by: Christiaan Welvaart <cjw@daneel.dyndns.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Backlund <tmb@mageia.org>

--

diff -Nurp linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h 
linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
--- linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h        2013-01-13 
20:09:54.257271755 +0200
+++ linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h    2013-01-13 
20:15:04.153676151 +0200
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
  #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H

  #include <linux/types.h>
+#include <linux/in6.h>

  #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_ATTR      "bridge"
  #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_FDB       "brforward"


-----
Thomas


[-- Attachment #2: if_bridge.h-include-in6.h-for-struct-in6_addr-use.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 764 bytes --]


if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h header.

Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.

Reported-by: Colin Guthrie <colin@mageia.org>
Reported-by: Christiaan Welvaart <cjw@daneel.dyndns.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Backlund <tmb@mageia.org>

--

diff -Nurp linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
--- linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h	2013-01-13 20:09:54.257271755 +0200
+++ linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h	2013-01-13 20:15:04.153676151 +0200
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
 
 #include <linux/types.h>
+#include <linux/in6.h>
 
 #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_ATTR	"bridge"
 #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_FDB	"brforward"

Re: if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use

[Thomas Backlund]

Thomas Backlund skrev 13.1.2013 20:38:
> patch both inline and attached as thunderbird tends to mess up ...

> -----
>
> if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h
> header.
>
> Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.
>

Ok,
ignore this patch, it's not the correct fix as it introduces
redefinitions...

Btw, the error that I hit that made me suggest this fix was libvirt
config check bailing out:

config.log:/usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:173:20: error: field 'ip6' has 
incomplete type

> Reported-by: Colin Guthrie <colin@mageia.org>
> Reported-by: Christiaan Welvaart <cjw@daneel.dyndns.org>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Backlund <tmb@mageia.org>
>
> --
>
> diff -Nurp linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> --- linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h        2013-01-13
> 20:09:54.257271755 +0200
> +++ linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h    2013-01-13
> 20:15:04.153676151 +0200
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>   #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
>
>   #include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/in6.h>
>
>   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_ATTR      "bridge"
>   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_FDB       "brforward"
>
>
> -----
> Thomas
>
--
Thomas

Re: [libvirt] if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use

[Eric Blake]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1335 bytes --]

On 01/13/2013 01:05 PM, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Thomas Backlund skrev 13.1.2013 20:38:
>> patch both inline and attached as thunderbird tends to mess up ...
> 
>> -----
>>
>> if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h
>> header.
>>
>> Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.
>>
> 
> Ok,
> ignore this patch, it's not the correct fix as it introduces
> redefinitions...
> 
> Btw, the error that I hit that made me suggest this fix was libvirt
> config check bailing out:
> 
> config.log:/usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:173:20: error: field 'ip6' has
> incomplete type

Hmm, just now noticing this thread, after independently hitting and and
having to work around the same problem in libvirt:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2013-January/msg00930.html
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895141

>> --- linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h        2013-01-13
>> 20:09:54.257271755 +0200
>> +++ linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h    2013-01-13
>> 20:15:04.153676151 +0200
>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>>   #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
>>
>>   #include <linux/types.h>
>> +#include <linux/in6.h>
>>

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 621 bytes --]

[libvirt] the patch "bridge: export multicast database via netlink" broke kernel 3.8 uapi (was: Re: if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use)

[Thomas Backlund]

Eric Blake skrev 15.1.2013 01:57:
> On 01/13/2013 01:05 PM, Thomas Backlund wrote:
>> Thomas Backlund skrev 13.1.2013 20:38:
>>> patch both inline and attached as thunderbird tends to mess up ...
>>
>>> -----
>>>
>>> if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h
>>> header.
>>>
>>> Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.
>>>
>>
>> Ok,
>> ignore this patch, it's not the correct fix as it introduces
>> redefinitions...
>>
>> Btw, the error that I hit that made me suggest this fix was libvirt
>> config check bailing out:
>>
>> config.log:/usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:173:20: error: field 'ip6' has
>> incomplete type
>
> Hmm, just now noticing this thread, after independently hitting and and
> having to work around the same problem in libvirt:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2013-January/msg00930.html
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895141


Yep,

and the commit breaking uapi headers is by using "struct in6_addr ip6" is:


 From ee07c6e7a6f8a25c18f0a6b18152fbd7499245f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 00:04:48 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] bridge: export multicast database via netlink

V5: fix two bugs pointed out by Thomas
     remove seq check for now, mark it as TODO

V4: remove some useless #include
     some coding style fix

V3: drop debugging printk's
     update selinux perm table as well

V2: drop patch 1/2, export ifindex directly
     Redesign netlink attributes
     Improve netlink seq check
     Handle IPv6 addr as well

This patch exports bridge multicast database via netlink
message type RTM_GETMDB. Similar to fdb, but currently bridge-specific.
We may need to support modify multicast database too (RTM_{ADD,DEL}MDB).

(Thanks to Thomas for patient reviews)

Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
---
  include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h |   55 ++++++++++++++
  include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h |    3 +
  net/bridge/Makefile            |    2 +-
  net/bridge/br_mdb.c            |  163 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  net/bridge/br_multicast.c      |    1 +
  net/bridge/br_private.h        |    1 +
  security/selinux/nlmsgtab.c    |    1 +
  7 files changed, 225 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 net/bridge/br_mdb.c

--
Thomas

Re: the patch "bridge: export multicast database via netlink" broke kernel 3.8 uapi (was: Re: [libvirt] if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use)

[Cong Wang]

On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 12:03 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Eric Blake skrev 15.1.2013 01:57:
> > On 01/13/2013 01:05 PM, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> >> Thomas Backlund skrev 13.1.2013 20:38:
> >>> patch both inline and attached as thunderbird tends to mess up ...
> >>
> >>> -----
> >>>
> >>> if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h
> >>> header.
> >>>
> >>> Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Ok,
> >> ignore this patch, it's not the correct fix as it introduces
> >> redefinitions...
> >>
> >> Btw, the error that I hit that made me suggest this fix was libvirt
> >> config check bailing out:
> >>
> >> config.log:/usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:173:20: error: field 'ip6' has
> >> incomplete type
> >
> > Hmm, just now noticing this thread, after independently hitting and and
> > having to work around the same problem in libvirt:
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2013-January/msg00930.html
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895141
> 
> 
> Yep,
> 
> and the commit breaking uapi headers is by using "struct in6_addr ip6" is:
> 
> 
>  From ee07c6e7a6f8a25c18f0a6b18152fbd7499245f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
> Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 00:04:48 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] bridge: export multicast database via netlink

Does the following patch help?

$ git diff include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
index 5db2975..653db23 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
 
 #include <linux/types.h>
+#include <linux/in6.h>
 
 #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_ATTR      "bridge"
 #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_FDB       "brforward"

Re: the patch "bridge: export multicast database via netlink" broke kernel 3.8 uapi

[Thomas Backlund]

Cong Wang skrev 15.1.2013 12:11:
> On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 12:03 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
>> Eric Blake skrev 15.1.2013 01:57:
>>> On 01/13/2013 01:05 PM, Thomas Backlund wrote:
>>>> Thomas Backlund skrev 13.1.2013 20:38:
>>>>> patch both inline and attached as thunderbird tends to mess up ...
>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>>
>>>>> if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h
>>>>> header.
>>>>>
>>>>> Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok,
>>>> ignore this patch, it's not the correct fix as it introduces
>>>> redefinitions...
>>>>
>>>> Btw, the error that I hit that made me suggest this fix was libvirt
>>>> config check bailing out:
>>>>
>>>> config.log:/usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:173:20: error: field 'ip6' has
>>>> incomplete type
>>>
>>> Hmm, just now noticing this thread, after independently hitting and and
>>> having to work around the same problem in libvirt:
>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2013-January/msg00930.html
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895141
>>
>>
>> Yep,
>>
>> and the commit breaking uapi headers is by using "struct in6_addr ip6" is:
>>
>>
>>   From ee07c6e7a6f8a25c18f0a6b18152fbd7499245f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
>> Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 00:04:48 +0000
>> Subject: [PATCH] bridge: export multicast database via netlink
>
> Does the following patch help?
>
> $ git diff include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> index 5db2975..653db23 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>   #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
>
>   #include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/in6.h>
>
>   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_ATTR      "bridge"
>   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_FDB       "brforward"
>

Well, I suggested the same fix in the beginning of the thread
on netdev and lkml: "if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use"

as it seemed to fix the libvirt case

but then asked it to be ignored after I tried to build connman,
and hit this conflict with glibc-2.17:

In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
                  from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
                  from src/connman.h:128,
                  from src/tethering.c:40:
/usr/include/netinet/in.h:35:5: error: expected identifier before 
numeric constant
/usr/include/netinet/in.h:197:8: error: redefinition of 'struct in6_addr'
In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
                  from src/tethering.c:38:
/usr/include/linux/in6.h:30:8: note: originally defined here
In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
                  from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
                  from src/connman.h:128,
                  from src/tethering.c:40:
/usr/include/netinet/in.h:238:8: error: redefinition of 'struct 
sockaddr_in6'
In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
                  from src/tethering.c:38:
/usr/include/linux/in6.h:46:8: note: originally defined here
In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
                  from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
                  from src/connman.h:128,
                  from src/tethering.c:40:
/usr/include/netinet/in.h:274:8: error: redefinition of 'struct ipv6_mreq'
In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
                  from src/tethering.c:38:
/usr/include/linux/in6.h:54:8: note: originally defined here
make[1]: *** [src/src_connmand-tethering.o] Error 1


So I'm not sure it's the right one...


--
Thomas

Re: the patch "bridge: export multicast database via netlink" broke kernel 3.8 uapi

[Cong Wang]

On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 12:55 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> 
> as it seemed to fix the libvirt case
> 
> but then asked it to be ignored after I tried to build connman,
> and hit this conflict with glibc-2.17:
> 
> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:35:5: error: expected identifier before 
> numeric constant
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:197:8: error: redefinition of 'struct in6_addr'
> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:30:8: note: originally defined here
> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:238:8: error: redefinition of 'struct 
> sockaddr_in6'
> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:46:8: note: originally defined here
> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:274:8: error: redefinition of 'struct ipv6_mreq'
> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:54:8: note: originally defined here
> make[1]: *** [src/src_connmand-tethering.o] Error 1
> 
> 
> So I'm not sure it's the right one...

% rpm -q --whatprovides /usr/include/netinet/in.h 
glibc-headers-2.14.90-24.fc16.9.x86_64

Seems we have conflicts with glibc headers...

Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Cong Wang]

(Cc'ing some glibc developers...)

Hello,

In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.

So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
before.

Thanks.

On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 12:55 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Cong Wang skrev 15.1.2013 12:11:
> >
> > Does the following patch help?
> >
> > $ git diff include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> > b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> > index 5db2975..653db23 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >   #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
> >
> >   #include <linux/types.h>
> > +#include <linux/in6.h>
> >
> >   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_ATTR      "bridge"
> >   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_FDB       "brforward"
> >
> 
> Well, I suggested the same fix in the beginning of the thread
> on netdev and lkml: "if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use"
> 
> as it seemed to fix the libvirt case
> 
> but then asked it to be ignored after I tried to build connman,
> and hit this conflict with glibc-2.17:
> 
> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:35:5: error: expected identifier before 
> numeric constant
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:197:8: error: redefinition of 'struct in6_addr'
> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:30:8: note: originally defined here
> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:238:8: error: redefinition of 'struct 
> sockaddr_in6'
> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:46:8: note: originally defined here
> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:274:8: error: redefinition of 'struct ipv6_mreq'
> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:54:8: note: originally defined here
> make[1]: *** [src/src_connmand-tethering.o] Error 1
> 
> 
> So I'm not sure it's the right one...
> 

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[YOSHIFUJI Hideaki]

Cong Wang wrote:
> (Cc'ing some glibc developers...)
> 
> Hello,
> 
> In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
> include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
> visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.
> 
> So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
> before.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 12:55 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
>> Cong Wang skrev 15.1.2013 12:11:
>>>
>>> Does the following patch help?
>>>
>>> $ git diff include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
>>> b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
>>> index 5db2975..653db23 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h
>>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>>>   #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
>>>
>>>   #include <linux/types.h>
>>> +#include <linux/in6.h>
>>>
>>>   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_ATTR      "bridge"
>>>   #define SYSFS_BRIDGE_FDB       "brforward"
>>>
>>
>> Well, I suggested the same fix in the beginning of the thread
>> on netdev and lkml: "if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use"
>>
>> as it seemed to fix the libvirt case
>>
>> but then asked it to be ignored after I tried to build connman,
>> and hit this conflict with glibc-2.17:
>>
>> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
>> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:35:5: error: expected identifier before 
>> numeric constant
>> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:197:8: error: redefinition of 'struct in6_addr'
>> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
>> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:30:8: note: originally defined here
>> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
>> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:238:8: error: redefinition of 'struct 
>> sockaddr_in6'
>> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
>> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:46:8: note: originally defined here
>> In file included from /usr/include/arpa/inet.h:22:0,
>>                   from ./include/connman/inet.h:25,
>>                   from src/connman.h:128,
>>                   from src/tethering.c:40:
>> /usr/include/netinet/in.h:274:8: error: redefinition of 'struct ipv6_mreq'
>> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:17:0,
>>                   from src/tethering.c:38:
>> /usr/include/linux/in6.h:54:8: note: originally defined here
>> make[1]: *** [src/src_connmand-tethering.o] Error 1
>>
>>
>> So I'm not sure it's the right one...

This is not a new issue.  In addition to this,
netinet/in.h also conflits with linux/in.h.

We might have
 #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)
 :
 #endif
around those conflicting definitions in uapi/linux/in{,6}.h.

--yoshfuji

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Ben Hutchings]

On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:21 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> Cong Wang wrote:
> > (Cc'ing some glibc developers...)
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
> > include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
> > visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.
> > 
> > So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
> > before.
[...]
> This is not a new issue.  In addition to this,
> netinet/in.h also conflits with linux/in.h.
> 
> We might have
>  #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)
>  :
>  #endif
> around those conflicting definitions in uapi/linux/in{,6}.h.

This only solves half the problem, as <netinet/in.h> might be included
after <linux/in.h>.  Also, not all Linux userland uses glibc.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1302 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 10:47:12 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:21 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> > Cong Wang wrote:
> > > (Cc'ing some glibc developers...)
> > > 
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
> > > include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
> > > visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.
> > > 
> > > So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
> > > before.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > This is not a new issue.  In addition to this,
> > netinet/in.h also conflits with linux/in.h.
> > 
> > We might have
> > 
> >  #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)
> >  
> >  #endif
> > 
> > around those conflicting definitions in uapi/linux/in{,6}.h.
> 
> This only solves half the problem, as <netinet/in.h> might be included
> after <linux/in.h>.  Also, not all Linux userland uses glibc.

certainly true, but the current expectation is that you don't mix your ABIs.  
if you're programming with the C library API, then use the C library headers.  
if you're banging directly on the kernel, then use the kernel headers.  not 
saying it's a perfect solution, but it works for the vast majority of use 
cases.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Ben Hutchings]

On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 12:04 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 10:47:12 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:21 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> > > Cong Wang wrote:
> > > > (Cc'ing some glibc developers...)
> > > > 
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
> > > > include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
> > > > visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.
> > > > 
> > > > So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
> > > > before.
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > This is not a new issue.  In addition to this,
> > > netinet/in.h also conflits with linux/in.h.
> > > 
> > > We might have
> > > 
> > >  #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)
> > >  
> > >  #endif
> > > 
> > > around those conflicting definitions in uapi/linux/in{,6}.h.
> > 
> > This only solves half the problem, as <netinet/in.h> might be included
> > after <linux/in.h>.  Also, not all Linux userland uses glibc.
> 
> certainly true, but the current expectation is that you don't mix your ABIs.

Whose expectation?  Which ABIs are being mixed?

> if you're programming with the C library API, then use the C library headers.  
> if you're banging directly on the kernel, then use the kernel headers.  not 
> saying it's a perfect solution, but it works for the vast majority of use 
> cases.

In practice most C programs for Linux will use a mixture of thinly
wrapped system calls and higher-level APIs from the C library, and never
really call the kernel directly (as that requires inline assembler).
Userland programmers will work around this historical mess by tweaking
the #include order or splitting source files.  But they shouldn't have
to.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2898 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 12:10:11 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 12:04 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 January 2013 10:47:12 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:21 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> > > > Cong Wang wrote:
> > > > > (Cc'ing some glibc developers...)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > 
> > > > > In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
> > > > > include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
> > > > > visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
> > > > > before.
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > > This is not a new issue.  In addition to this,
> > > > netinet/in.h also conflits with linux/in.h.
> > > > 
> > > > We might have
> > > > 
> > > >  #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)
> > > >  
> > > >  #endif
> > > > 
> > > > around those conflicting definitions in uapi/linux/in{,6}.h.
> > > 
> > > This only solves half the problem, as <netinet/in.h> might be included
> > > after <linux/in.h>.  Also, not all Linux userland uses glibc.
> > 
> > certainly true, but the current expectation is that you don't mix your
> > ABIs.
> 
> Whose expectation?  Which ABIs are being mixed?

the kernel's view of the world and the C library's view of the world.  there 
is a lot of overlap, but it's the C library's job to provide a POSIX compliant 
interface (and then some).

obvious examples:
 - the stat structures are not the same and require translation
 - ptrace structures are not the same and you really need to use the C lib one
 - the readdir function is completely different

but to this specific question, if you're calling the kernel's network functions 
directly, then you need to include the kernel's headers for its definition of 
how things are passed.  if you're calling the C library's network functions, 
then use the C library's headers.

> > if you're programming with the C library API, then use the C library
> > headers. if you're banging directly on the kernel, then use the kernel
> > headers.  not saying it's a perfect solution, but it works for the vast
> > majority of use cases.
> 
> In practice most C programs for Linux will use a mixture of thinly
> wrapped system calls and higher-level APIs from the C library, and never
> really call the kernel directly (as that requires inline assembler).
> Userland programmers will work around this historical mess by tweaking
> the #include order or splitting source files.  But they shouldn't have
> to.

if you're not calling the kernel directly, why are you including the kernel 
headers ?  what is the problem people are actually trying to address here (and 
no, "i want to include both headers" is not the answer) ?
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[David Miller]

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:28:39 -0500

> if you're not calling the kernel directly, why are you including the kernel 
> headers ?  what is the problem people are actually trying to address here (and 
> no, "i want to include both headers" is not the answer) ?

When GLIBC doesn't provide it's own definition of some networking
macros or interfaces that the kernel provides, people include the
kernel header.

This has been done for decades, wake up.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 895 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 13:59:59 David Miller wrote:
> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> > if you're not calling the kernel directly, why are you including the
> > kernel headers ?  what is the problem people are actually trying to
> > address here (and no, "i want to include both headers" is not the
> > answer) ?
> 
> When GLIBC doesn't provide it's own definition of some networking
> macros or interfaces that the kernel provides, people include the
> kernel header.

sounds like glibc's headers are out of date and we should update them to 
include the missing definitions

but this is still too vague.  what headers/definitions do people want to see 
simultaneously included ?  changes would be needed on both sides (kernel & C 
library).

> This has been done for decades, wake up.

and it's been broken for just as long.  no need to be a dick.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[David Miller]

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:22:16 -0500

> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 13:59:59 David Miller wrote:
>> This has been done for decades, wake up.
> 
> and it's been broken for just as long.  no need to be a dick.

By being ignorant and having such a simplistic view of the situation,
you're the one who's actually the dick.
 

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Cong Wang]

On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 14:22 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 
> but this is still too vague.  what headers/definitions do people want to see 
> simultaneously included ?  changes would be needed on both sides (kernel & C 
> library).
> 

Hi, Mike,

Please take a look at my first email in this thread. The user
application includes <linux/if_bridge.h> and <netinet/in.h>.

<linux/if_bridge.h> uses struct_in6 but doesn't include <linux/in6.h>
(this is my bad, sorry), an obvious fix is just including <linux/in6.h>.
But this immediately breaks applications which include
<linux/if_bridge.h> and <netinet/in.h>, just as what Thomas reported.

And if_bridge.h is kernel-specific, there is no corresponding glibc one,
so you can't blame applications which include both of them.

Thanks.

Re: [libvirt] Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Jike Song]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 539 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:59 AM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:

>
> When GLIBC doesn't provide it's own definition of some networking
> macros or interfaces that the kernel provides, people include the
> kernel header.
>

Recently I got a problem when copying a structure from kernel to userspace,
after debugging I found:

kernel:   include/linux/inet.h

#define INET6_ADDRSTRLEN        (48)

glibc:  /usr/include/netinet/in.h

#define INET6_ADDRSTRLEN 46


Any reason to differentiate them from each other?

-- 
Thanks,
Jike

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Cong Wang]

On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 11:55 +0800, Jike Song wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:59 AM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> 
> >
> > When GLIBC doesn't provide it's own definition of some networking
> > macros or interfaces that the kernel provides, people include the
> > kernel header.
> >
> 
> Recently I got a problem when copying a structure from kernel to userspace,
> after debugging I found:
> 
> kernel:   include/linux/inet.h
> 
> #define INET6_ADDRSTRLEN        (48)
> 
> glibc:  /usr/include/netinet/in.h
> 
> #define INET6_ADDRSTRLEN 46
> 
> 
> Any reason to differentiate them from each other?
> 

I see no reason, even although I don't know why it is 46 instead of 40.

But include/linux/inet.h is not exported to user-space, AFAIK.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Cong Wang]

----- Original Message -----
> 
> I see no reason, even although I don't know why it is 46 instead of
> 40.

Ok, for "0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:255.255.255.255".

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[David Miller]

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:04:56 -0500

> certainly true, but the current expectation is that you don't mix your ABIs.  
> if you're programming with the C library API, then use the C library headers.  
> if you're banging directly on the kernel, then use the kernel headers.  not 
> saying it's a perfect solution, but it works for the vast majority of use 
> cases.

This isn't how real life works.

GLIBC itself brings in some of the kernel headers, as do various library
headers for libraries other than glibc.

So you can get these conflicting headers included indirectly, and it is
of no fault of any of the various parties involved.

We have to make them work when included at the same time somehow, and
this is totally unavoidable.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1916 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 13:57:44 David Miller wrote:
> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> > certainly true, but the current expectation is that you don't mix your
> > ABIs. if you're programming with the C library API, then use the C
> > library headers. if you're banging directly on the kernel, then use the
> > kernel headers.  not saying it's a perfect solution, but it works for
> > the vast majority of use cases.
> 
> This isn't how real life works.
> 
> GLIBC itself brings in some of the kernel headers, as do various library
> headers for libraries other than glibc.
> 
> So you can get these conflicting headers included indirectly, and it is
> of no fault of any of the various parties involved.

the headers glibc includes tend to be pretty stand alone specifically so that 
it doesn't matter

> We have to make them work when included at the same time somehow, and
> this is totally unavoidable.

"them" is vague.  saying that every kernel header has to be usable in the same 
compilation unit as every C library header regardless of order is unrealistic 
(at least it is today).  there are cases where they define the same structure 
different because the structure as the C library expects is different from what 
the kernel syscall expects.  you could avoid that on the kernel side by giving 
them all prefixes (like __kernel_), but that didn't seem entirely palpable to 
the kernel folks.  i couldn't even get them to remove crap that breaks non-
glibc C libraries (e.g. uapi/linux/stat.h -- looks like someone inadvertently 
fixed uapi/linux/socket.h finally).

for many networking headers, the C library will provide enums & defines while 
the kernel only provides enums.  including the kernel after the C library one 
leads to parsing errors as the defines expand in the enum and kill it.  like 
linux/in.h and netinet/in.h and IPPROTO_*.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 01/16/2013 01:57 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:04:56 -0500
> 
>> certainly true, but the current expectation is that you don't mix your ABIs.  
>> if you're programming with the C library API, then use the C library headers.  
>> if you're banging directly on the kernel, then use the kernel headers.  not 
>> saying it's a perfect solution, but it works for the vast majority of use 
>> cases.
> 
> This isn't how real life works.
> 
> GLIBC itself brings in some of the kernel headers, as do various library
> headers for libraries other than glibc.
> 
> So you can get these conflicting headers included indirectly, and it is
> of no fault of any of the various parties involved.
> 
> We have to make them work when included at the same time somehow, and
> this is totally unavoidable.
> 

Just to put some code behind the comments I made earlier.

Solution:
=========

- Synchronize linux's `include/uapi/linux/in6.h' 
  with glibc's `inet/netinet/in.h'.
- Synchronize glibc's `inet/netinet/in.h with linux's
  `include/uapi/linux/in6.h'.
- Allow including the headers in either other.
- First header included defines the structures and macros.

Details:
========

The kernel promises not to break the UAPI ABI so I don't 
see why we can't just have the two userspace headers
coordinate?

If you include the kernel headers first you get those,
and if you include the glibc headers first you get those,
and the following patch arranges a coordination and
synchronization between the two.

Let's handle `include/uapi/linux/in6.h' from linux, 
and `inet/netinet/in.h' from glibc and ensure they compile
in any order and preserve the required ABI.

These two patches pass the following compile tests:

cat >> test1.c <<EOF
#include <netinet/in.h>
#include <linux/in6.h>
int main (void) {
  return 0;
}
EOF
gcc -c test1.c

cat >> test2.c <<EOF
#include <linux/in6.h>
#include <netinet/in.h>
int main (void) {
  return 0;
}
EOF
gcc -c test2.c

One wrinkle is that the kernel has a different name for one of
the members in ipv6_mreq. In the kernel patch we create a macro
to cover the uses of the old name, and while that's not entirely
clean it's one of the best solutions (aside from an anonymous
union which has other issues).

I've reviewed the code and it looks to me like the ABI is
assured and everything matches on both sides.

Comments?

Notes:
- You want netinet/in.h to include bits/in.h as early as possible,
  but it needs in_addr so define in_addr early.
- You want bits/in.h included as early as possible so you can use
  the linux specific code to define __USE_KERNEL_DEFS based on 
  the _UAPI_* macro definition and use those to cull in.h.
- glibc was missing IPPROTO_MH, added here.

glibc/

2012-01-16  Carlos O'Donell  <carlos@redhat.com>

	* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/in.h
	[_UAPI_LINUX_IN6_H]: Define __USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS.
	* inet/netinet/in.h: Move in_addr definition and bits/in.h inclusion
	before __USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS uses.
	* inet/netinet/in.h [!__USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS]: Define IPPROTO_MH, and
	IPPROTO_BEETPH.
	[__USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS]: Don't define any of IPPROTO_*, in6_addr,
	sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq.

diff --git a/inet/netinet/in.h b/inet/netinet/in.h
index 89e3813..882739d 100644
--- a/inet/netinet/in.h
+++ b/inet/netinet/in.h
@@ -26,6 +26,20 @@
 
 __BEGIN_DECLS
 
+/* Internet address.  */
+typedef uint32_t in_addr_t;
+struct in_addr
+  {
+    in_addr_t s_addr;
+  };
+
+/* Get system-specific definitions.  */
+#include <bits/in.h>
+
+/* If __USER_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS is defined then the user has included the kernel
+   network headers first and we should use those ABI-identical definitions
+   instead of our own.  */
+#ifndef __USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS
 /* Standard well-defined IP protocols.  */
 enum
   {
@@ -75,6 +89,8 @@ enum
 #define IPPROTO_DSTOPTS		IPPROTO_DSTOPTS
     IPPROTO_MTP = 92,	   /* Multicast Transport Protocol.  */
 #define IPPROTO_MTP		IPPROTO_MTP
+    IPPROTO_BEETPH = 94,   /* IP option pseudo header for BEET.  */
+#define IPPROTO_BEETPH		IPPROTO_BEETPH
     IPPROTO_ENCAP = 98,	   /* Encapsulation Header.  */
 #define IPPROTO_ENCAP		IPPROTO_ENCAP
     IPPROTO_PIM = 103,	   /* Protocol Independent Multicast.  */
@@ -83,13 +99,15 @@ enum
 #define IPPROTO_COMP		IPPROTO_COMP
     IPPROTO_SCTP = 132,	   /* Stream Control Transmission Protocol.  */
 #define IPPROTO_SCTP		IPPROTO_SCTP
+    IPPROTO_MH = 135,      /* IPv6 mobility header.  */
+#define IPPROTO_MH		IPPROTO_MH
     IPPROTO_UDPLITE = 136, /* UDP-Lite protocol.  */
 #define IPPROTO_UDPLITE		IPPROTO_UDPLITE
     IPPROTO_RAW = 255,	   /* Raw IP packets.  */
 #define IPPROTO_RAW		IPPROTO_RAW
     IPPROTO_MAX
   };
-
+#endif /* !__USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS */
 
 /* Type to represent a port.  */
 typedef uint16_t in_port_t;
@@ -134,15 +152,6 @@ enum
     IPPORT_USERRESERVED = 5000
   };
 
-
-/* Internet address.  */
-typedef uint32_t in_addr_t;
-struct in_addr
-  {
-    in_addr_t s_addr;
-  };
-
-
 /* Definitions of the bits in an Internet address integer.
 
    On subnets, host and network parts are found according to
@@ -191,7 +200,7 @@ struct in_addr
 #define INADDR_ALLRTRS_GROUP    ((in_addr_t) 0xe0000002) /* 224.0.0.2 */
 #define INADDR_MAX_LOCAL_GROUP  ((in_addr_t) 0xe00000ff) /* 224.0.0.255 */
 
-
+#ifndef __USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS
 /* IPv6 address */
 struct in6_addr
   {
@@ -209,6 +218,7 @@ struct in6_addr
 # define s6_addr32		__in6_u.__u6_addr32
 #endif
   };
+#endif /* !__USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS */
 
 extern const struct in6_addr in6addr_any;        /* :: */
 extern const struct in6_addr in6addr_loopback;   /* ::1 */
@@ -218,7 +228,6 @@ extern const struct in6_addr in6addr_loopback;   /* ::1 */
 #define INET_ADDRSTRLEN 16
 #define INET6_ADDRSTRLEN 46
 
-
 /* Structure describing an Internet socket address.  */
 struct sockaddr_in
   {
@@ -233,6 +242,7 @@ struct sockaddr_in
 			   sizeof (struct in_addr)];
   };
 
+#ifndef __USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS
 /* Ditto, for IPv6.  */
 struct sockaddr_in6
   {
@@ -242,7 +252,7 @@ struct sockaddr_in6
     struct in6_addr sin6_addr;	/* IPv6 address */
     uint32_t sin6_scope_id;	/* IPv6 scope-id */
   };
-
+#endif /* !__USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS */
 
 #if defined __USE_MISC || defined __USE_GNU
 /* IPv4 multicast request.  */
@@ -268,7 +278,7 @@ struct ip_mreq_source
   };
 #endif
 
-
+#ifndef __USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS
 /* Likewise, for IPv6.  */
 struct ipv6_mreq
   {
@@ -278,7 +288,7 @@ struct ipv6_mreq
     /* local interface */
     unsigned int ipv6mr_interface;
   };
-
+#endif /* !__USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS */
 
 #if defined __USE_MISC || defined __USE_GNU
 /* Multicast group request.  */
@@ -349,10 +359,6 @@ struct group_filter
 				      * sizeof (struct sockaddr_storage)))
 #endif
 
-
-/* Get system-specific definitions.  */
-#include <bits/in.h>
-
 /* Functions to convert between host and network byte order.
 
    Please note that these functions normally take `unsigned long int' or
diff --git a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/in.h b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/in.h
index e959b33..36bb72b 100644
--- a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/in.h
+++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/in.h
@@ -21,6 +21,15 @@
 # error "Never use <bits/in.h> directly; include <netinet/in.h> instead."
 #endif
 
+/* If the application has already included linux/in6.h from a linux-based
+   kernel then we will not define IPPROTO_* defines, in6_addr (nor the 
+   defines), sockaddr_in6, or ip_mreq.  The ABI used by the linux-kernel
+   and glibc match exactly.  Neither the linux kernel nor glibc should 
+   break this ABI without coordination.  */
+#ifdef _UAPI_LINUX_IN6_H
+# define __USE_KERNEL_IPV6_DEFS 
+#endif
+
 /* Options for use with `getsockopt' and `setsockopt' at the IP level.
    The first word in the comment at the right is the data type used;
    "bool" means a boolean value stored in an `int'.  */
---

linux/

Compile tested and inspected.

Signed-off-by: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>

 include/uapi/linux/in.h      |   32 +-----------------------
 include/uapi/linux/in6.h     |   50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 include/uapi/linux/ipproto.h |    0 
 include/uapi/linux/ipproto.h |   57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 4 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/in.h b/include/uapi/linux/in.h
index 9edb441..998ecb2 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/in.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/in.h
@@ -21,36 +21,8 @@
 #include <linux/types.h>
 #include <linux/socket.h>
 
-/* Standard well-defined IP protocols.  */
-enum {
-  IPPROTO_IP = 0,		/* Dummy protocol for TCP		*/
-  IPPROTO_ICMP = 1,		/* Internet Control Message Protocol	*/
-  IPPROTO_IGMP = 2,		/* Internet Group Management Protocol	*/
-  IPPROTO_IPIP = 4,		/* IPIP tunnels (older KA9Q tunnels use 94) */
-  IPPROTO_TCP = 6,		/* Transmission Control Protocol	*/
-  IPPROTO_EGP = 8,		/* Exterior Gateway Protocol		*/
-  IPPROTO_PUP = 12,		/* PUP protocol				*/
-  IPPROTO_UDP = 17,		/* User Datagram Protocol		*/
-  IPPROTO_IDP = 22,		/* XNS IDP protocol			*/
-  IPPROTO_DCCP = 33,		/* Datagram Congestion Control Protocol */
-  IPPROTO_RSVP = 46,		/* RSVP protocol			*/
-  IPPROTO_GRE = 47,		/* Cisco GRE tunnels (rfc 1701,1702)	*/
-
-  IPPROTO_IPV6	 = 41,		/* IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnelling		*/
-
-  IPPROTO_ESP = 50,            /* Encapsulation Security Payload protocol */
-  IPPROTO_AH = 51,             /* Authentication Header protocol       */
-  IPPROTO_BEETPH = 94,	       /* IP option pseudo header for BEET */
-  IPPROTO_PIM    = 103,		/* Protocol Independent Multicast	*/
-
-  IPPROTO_COMP   = 108,                /* Compression Header protocol */
-  IPPROTO_SCTP   = 132,		/* Stream Control Transport Protocol	*/
-  IPPROTO_UDPLITE = 136,	/* UDP-Lite (RFC 3828)			*/
-
-  IPPROTO_RAW	 = 255,		/* Raw IP packets			*/
-  IPPROTO_MAX
-};
-
+/* Include IPPROTO_* defines. */
+#include <linux/ipproto.h>
 
 /* Internet address. */
 struct in_addr {
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
index f79c372..a2b16a5 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
@@ -23,6 +23,13 @@
 
 #include <linux/types.h>
 
+/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will not 
+ * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq. The
+ * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the kernel
+ * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
+ */
+#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
+
 /*
  *	IPv6 address structure
  */
@@ -30,12 +37,20 @@
 struct in6_addr {
 	union {
 		__u8		u6_addr8[16];
+#if !defined(__GLIBC__) \
+    || (defined(__GLIBC__) && (defined(__USE_MISC) || defined(__USE_GNU))) \
+    || defined(__KERNEL__)
 		__be16		u6_addr16[8];
 		__be32		u6_addr32[4];
+#endif
 	} in6_u;
+#if !defined(__GLIBC__) \
+    || (defined(__GLIBC__) && (defined(__USE_MISC) || defined(__USE_GNU))) \
+    || defined(__KERNEL__)
 #define s6_addr			in6_u.u6_addr8
 #define s6_addr16		in6_u.u6_addr16
 #define s6_addr32		in6_u.u6_addr32
+#endif
 };
 
 /* IPv6 Wildcard Address (::) and Loopback Address (::1) defined in RFC2553
@@ -56,9 +71,12 @@ struct ipv6_mreq {
 	struct in6_addr ipv6mr_multiaddr;
 
 	/* local IPv6 address of interface */
-	int		ipv6mr_ifindex;
+	int		ipv6mr_interface;
+#define ipv6mr_ifindex	ipv6mr_interface
 };
 
+#endif /* !_NET_INET_H */
+
 #define ipv6mr_acaddr	ipv6mr_multiaddr
 
 struct in6_flowlabel_req {
@@ -116,16 +134,32 @@ struct in6_flowlabel_req {
 #define IPV6_PRIORITY_14		0x0e00
 #define IPV6_PRIORITY_15		0x0f00
 
+
+#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
+#if defined (__GLIBC__)
+/* Include all of the other IPPROTO_* defines for userspace. */
+#include <linux/ipproto.h>
+#endif
 /*
  *	IPV6 extension headers
  */
-#define IPPROTO_HOPOPTS		0	/* IPv6 hop-by-hop options	*/
-#define IPPROTO_ROUTING		43	/* IPv6 routing header		*/
-#define IPPROTO_FRAGMENT	44	/* IPv6 fragmentation header	*/
-#define IPPROTO_ICMPV6		58	/* ICMPv6			*/
-#define IPPROTO_NONE		59	/* IPv6 no next header		*/
-#define IPPROTO_DSTOPTS		60	/* IPv6 destination options	*/
-#define IPPROTO_MH		135	/* IPv6 mobility header		*/
+enum {
+  IPPROTO_HOPOPTS = 0,		/* IPv6 hop-by-hop options      */
+#define IPPROTO_HOPOPTS		IPPROTO_HOPOPTS
+  IPPROTO_ROUTING = 43,		/* IPv6 routing header          */
+#define IPPROTO_ROUTING		IPPROTO_ROUTING
+  IPPROTO_FRAGMENT = 44,	/* IPv6 fragmentation header    */
+#define IPPROTO_FRAGMENT	IPPROTO_FRAGMENT
+  IPPROTO_ICMPV6 = 58,		/* ICMPv6                       */
+#define IPPROTO_ICMPV6		IPPROTO_ICMPV6
+  IPPROTO_NONE = 59,		/* IPv6 no next header          */
+#define IPPROTO_NONE		IPPROTO_NONE
+  IPPROTO_DSTOPTS = 60,		/* IPv6 destination options     */
+#define IPPROTO_DSTOPTS		IPPROTO_DSTOPTS
+  IPPROTO_MH = 135,		/* IPv6 mobility header         */
+#define IPPROTO_MH		IPPROTO_MH
+};
+#endif /* !_NETINET_IN_H */
 
 /*
  *	IPv6 TLV options.
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/ipproto.h b/include/uapi/linux/ipproto.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5a183e6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/ipproto.h
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+#ifndef _UAPI_LINUX_IPPROTO_H
+#define _UAPI_LINUX_IPPROTO_H
+
+/* Standard well-defined IP protocols. */
+enum {
+  IPPROTO_IP = 0,		/* Dummy protocol for TCP. */
+#define IPPROTO_IP		IPPROTO_IP
+  IPPROTO_ICMP = 1,		/* Internet Control Message Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_ICMP		IPPROTO_ICMP
+  IPPROTO_IGMP = 2,		/* Internet Group Management Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_IGMP		IPPROTO_IGMP
+  IPPROTO_IPIP = 4,		/* IPIP tunnels (older KA9Q tunnels use 94). */
+#define IPPROTO_IPIP		IPPROTO_IPIP
+  IPPROTO_TCP = 6,		/* Transmission Control Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_TCP		IPPROTO_TCP
+  IPPROTO_EGP = 8,		/* Exterior Gateway Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_EGP		IPPROTO_EGP
+  IPPROTO_PUP = 12,		/* PUP protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_PUP		IPPROTO_PUP
+  IPPROTO_UDP = 17,		/* User Datagram Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_UDP		IPPROTO_UDP
+  IPPROTO_IDP = 22,		/* XNS IDP protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_IDP		IPPROTO_IDP
+  IPPROTO_TP = 29,		/* SO Transport Protocol Class 4. */
+#define IPPROTO_TP		IPPROTO_TP
+  IPPROTO_DCCP = 33,		/* Datagram Congestion Control Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_DCCP		IPPROTO_DCCP
+  IPPROTO_IPV6 = 41,		/* IPv6 header. */
+#define IPPROTO_IPV6		IPPROTO_IPV6
+  IPPROTO_RSVP = 46,		/* Reservation Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_RSVP		IPPROTO_RSVP
+  IPPROTO_GRE = 47,		/* General Routing Encapsulation. */
+#define IPPROTO_GRE		IPPROTO_GRE
+  IPPROTO_ESP = 50,		/* encapsulating security payload. */
+#define IPPROTO_ESP		IPPROTO_ESP
+  IPPROTO_AH = 51,		/* authentication header. */
+#define IPPROTO_AH		IPPROTO_AH
+  IPPROTO_MTP = 92,		/* Multicast Transport Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_MTP		IPPROTO_MTP
+  IPPROTO_BEETPH = 94,		/* IP option pseudo header for BEET. */
+#define IPPROTO_BEETPH		IPPROTO_BEETPH
+  IPPROTO_ENCAP = 98,		/* Encapsulation Header. */
+#define IPPROTO_ENCAP		IPPROTO_ENCAP
+  IPPROTO_PIM = 103,		/* Protocol Independent Multicast. */
+#define IPPROTO_PIM		IPPROTO_PIM
+  IPPROTO_COMP = 108,		/* Compression Header Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_COMP		IPPROTO_COMP
+  IPPROTO_SCTP = 132,		/* Stream Control Transmission Protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_SCTP		IPPROTO_SCTP
+  IPPROTO_UDPLITE = 136,	/* UDP-Lite protocol. */
+#define IPPROTO_UDPLITE		IPPROTO_UDPLITE
+  IPPROTO_RAW = 255,		/* Raw IP packets. */
+#define IPPROTO_RAW		IPPROTO_RAW
+  IPPROTO_MAX
+};
+
+#endif /* _UAPI_LINUX_IPPROTO_H */
---

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[YOSHIFUJI Hideaki]

Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
> index f79c372..a2b16a5 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
:
>  #define IPV6_PRIORITY_14		0x0e00
>  #define IPV6_PRIORITY_15		0x0f00
>  
> +
> +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
> +#if defined (__GLIBC__)
> +/* Include all of the other IPPROTO_* defines for userspace. */
> +#include <linux/ipproto.h>
> +#endif
>  /*
>   *	IPV6 extension headers

Overall, it looks good, but why including linux/ipproto.h?

--yoshfuji

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[David Miller]

From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:15:03 -0500

> +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will not 
> + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq. The
> + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the kernel
> + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
> + */
> +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
> +

I think we should shoot for a non-glibc-centric solution.

I can't imagine that other libc's won't have the same exact problem
with their netinet/in.h conflicting with the kernel's, redefining
structures like in6_addr, that we'd want to provide a protection
scheme for here as well.

Let's pick some more generic names and themes for the CPP macros and
comments we use to protect the header file blocks and describe that
protection scheme.

Thanks.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1012 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 22:15:38 David Miller wrote:
> From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:15:03 -0500
> 
> > +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will
> > not + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq.
> > The + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the
> > kernel + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
> > + */
> > +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
> > +
> 
> I think we should shoot for a non-glibc-centric solution.
> 
> I can't imagine that other libc's won't have the same exact problem
> with their netinet/in.h conflicting with the kernel's, redefining
> structures like in6_addr, that we'd want to provide a protection
> scheme for here as well.

yes, the kernel's use of __GLIBC__ in exported headers has already caused 
problems in the past.  fortunately, it's been reduced down to just one case 
now (stat.h).  let's not balloon it back up.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 22:15:38 David Miller wrote:
>> From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
>> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:15:03 -0500
>>
>> > +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will
>> > not + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq.
>> > The + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the
>> > kernel + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
>> > + */
>> > +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
>> > +
>>
>> I think we should shoot for a non-glibc-centric solution.
>>
>> I can't imagine that other libc's won't have the same exact problem
>> with their netinet/in.h conflicting with the kernel's, redefining
>> structures like in6_addr, that we'd want to provide a protection
>> scheme for here as well.
>
> yes, the kernel's use of __GLIBC__ in exported headers has already caused
> problems in the past.  fortunately, it's been reduced down to just one case
> now (stat.h).  let's not balloon it back up.
> -mike

I also see coda.h has grown a __GLIBC__ usage.

In the next revision of the patch I created a single libc-compat.h header
which encompasses the logic for any libc that wants to coordinate with
the kernel headers.

It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into libc-compat.h,
then you control userspace libc coordination from one file.

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1587 bytes --]

On Thursday 17 January 2013 23:22:26 Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 January 2013 22:15:38 David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
> >> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:15:03 -0500
> >> 
> >> > +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will
> >> > not + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq.
> >> > The + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the
> >> > kernel + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
> >> > + */
> >> > +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
> >> > +
> >> 
> >> I think we should shoot for a non-glibc-centric solution.
> >> 
> >> I can't imagine that other libc's won't have the same exact problem
> >> with their netinet/in.h conflicting with the kernel's, redefining
> >> structures like in6_addr, that we'd want to provide a protection
> >> scheme for here as well.
> > 
> > yes, the kernel's use of __GLIBC__ in exported headers has already caused
> > problems in the past.  fortunately, it's been reduced down to just one
> > case now (stat.h).  let's not balloon it back up.
> 
> I also see coda.h has grown a __GLIBC__ usage.

that file is just a pile of cruft :).  it's something that'd be rejected by 
today's kernel standard as it's full of OS shim code.  "#ifdef DOS" ?  comeon!

fortunately, coda is pretty uncommon, so this issue doesn't bite most people, 
and i've never bothered with it.  the same cannot be said of stat.h.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Pedro Alves]

On 01/18/2013 04:22 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 22:15:38 David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
>>> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:15:03 -0500
>>>
>>>> +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will
>>>> not + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq.
>>>> The + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the
>>>> kernel + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
>>>> + */
>>>> +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
>>>> +
>>>
>>> I think we should shoot for a non-glibc-centric solution.
>>>
>>> I can't imagine that other libc's won't have the same exact problem
>>> with their netinet/in.h conflicting with the kernel's, redefining
>>> structures like in6_addr, that we'd want to provide a protection
>>> scheme for here as well.
>>
>> yes, the kernel's use of __GLIBC__ in exported headers has already caused
>> problems in the past.  fortunately, it's been reduced down to just one case
>> now (stat.h).  let's not balloon it back up.
>> -mike
> 
> I also see coda.h has grown a __GLIBC__ usage.
> 
> In the next revision of the patch I created a single libc-compat.h header
> which encompasses the logic for any libc that wants to coordinate with
> the kernel headers.


> It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into libc-compat.h,
> then you control userspace libc coordination from one file.

How about just deciding on a single macro/symbol both the
kernel and libc (any libc that needs this) define?  Something
like both the kernel and userland doing:

#ifndef __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
#define __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
...
define in6_addr, sockaddr_in6, ipv6_mreq, whatnot
#endif

So whichever the application includes first, wins.
Too naive?  I didn't see this option being discarded, so
not sure it was considered.

-- 
Pedro Alves

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 01/18/2013 05:44 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 01/18/2013 04:22 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 22:15:38 David Miller wrote:
>>>> From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
>>>> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:15:03 -0500
>>>>
>>>>> +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will
>>>>> not + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq.
>>>>> The + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the
>>>>> kernel + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> I think we should shoot for a non-glibc-centric solution.
>>>>
>>>> I can't imagine that other libc's won't have the same exact problem
>>>> with their netinet/in.h conflicting with the kernel's, redefining
>>>> structures like in6_addr, that we'd want to provide a protection
>>>> scheme for here as well.
>>>
>>> yes, the kernel's use of __GLIBC__ in exported headers has already caused
>>> problems in the past.  fortunately, it's been reduced down to just one case
>>> now (stat.h).  let's not balloon it back up.
>>> -mike
>>
>> I also see coda.h has grown a __GLIBC__ usage.
>>
>> In the next revision of the patch I created a single libc-compat.h header
>> which encompasses the logic for any libc that wants to coordinate with
>> the kernel headers.
> 
> 
>> It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into libc-compat.h,
>> then you control userspace libc coordination from one file.
> 
> How about just deciding on a single macro/symbol both the
> kernel and libc (any libc that needs this) define?  Something
> like both the kernel and userland doing:
> 
> #ifndef __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
> #define __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
> ...
> define in6_addr, sockaddr_in6, ipv6_mreq, whatnot
> #endif
> 
> So whichever the application includes first, wins.
> Too naive?  I didn't see this option being discarded, so
> not sure it was considered.

Too naive, but *close* to what my patch does :-)

The kernel definitions when included first, and in a 
glibc userspace, must try to mimic the glibc userspace 
headers and we need more than one guard macro to do 
that effectively.

The reason I jumped into the code is because this kind of
problem is easy to talk about, but the devil is in the 
details.

There are certainly some compromises on both sides, but
the solution promises to solve this problem.

Honestly without UAPI this would have been an impossible
task.

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[YOSHIFUJI Hideaki]

Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 01/18/2013 05:44 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 01/18/2013 04:22 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 22:15:38 David Miller wrote:
>>>>> From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:15:03 -0500
>>>>>
>>>>>> +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will
>>>>>> not + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq.
>>>>>> The + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the
>>>>>> kernel + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should shoot for a non-glibc-centric solution.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't imagine that other libc's won't have the same exact problem
>>>>> with their netinet/in.h conflicting with the kernel's, redefining
>>>>> structures like in6_addr, that we'd want to provide a protection
>>>>> scheme for here as well.
>>>>
>>>> yes, the kernel's use of __GLIBC__ in exported headers has already caused
>>>> problems in the past.  fortunately, it's been reduced down to just one case
>>>> now (stat.h).  let's not balloon it back up.
>>>> -mike
>>>
>>> I also see coda.h has grown a __GLIBC__ usage.
>>>
>>> In the next revision of the patch I created a single libc-compat.h header
>>> which encompasses the logic for any libc that wants to coordinate with
>>> the kernel headers.
>>
>>
>>> It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into libc-compat.h,
>>> then you control userspace libc coordination from one file.
>>
>> How about just deciding on a single macro/symbol both the
>> kernel and libc (any libc that needs this) define?  Something
>> like both the kernel and userland doing:
>> 
>> #ifndef __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>> #define __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>> ...
>> define in6_addr, sockaddr_in6, ipv6_mreq, whatnot
>> #endif

Hmm, how should we handle future structs/enums then?
For example, if I want to have in6_flowlabel_req{} defined in
glibc, what should we do?

We probably want to have __LIBC_HAS_STRUCT_IN6_FLOWLABEL_REQ
defined.

--yoshfuji

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Pedro Alves]

On 01/18/2013 02:24 PM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:

>>>> It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into libc-compat.h,
>>>> then you control userspace libc coordination from one file.
>>>
>>> How about just deciding on a single macro/symbol both the
>>> kernel and libc (any libc that needs this) define?  Something
>>> like both the kernel and userland doing:
>>>
>>> #ifndef __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>>> #define __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>>> ...
>>> define in6_addr, sockaddr_in6, ipv6_mreq, whatnot
>>> #endif
> 
> Hmm, how should we handle future structs/enums then?
> For example, if I want to have in6_flowlabel_req{} defined in
> glibc, what should we do?

Include the glibc header first?  Or is this some other
use case?

The point wasn't that you'd have only one macro for all
structs/enums (you could split into __IPV6_IN6_ADDR_DEFINED,
__IPV6_SOCKADDR_IN6_DEFINED, etc.) but to have the kernel
and libc agree on guard macros, instead of having the kernel
do #ifdef __GLIBC__ and glibc doing #ifdef _NETINET_IN_H.

But as Carlos says, the devil is in the details, and
I sure am not qualified on the details here.

-- 
Pedro Alves

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Carlos O'Donell]

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 01/18/2013 02:24 PM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
>
>>>>> It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into libc-compat.h,
>>>>> then you control userspace libc coordination from one file.
>>>>
>>>> How about just deciding on a single macro/symbol both the
>>>> kernel and libc (any libc that needs this) define?  Something
>>>> like both the kernel and userland doing:
>>>>
>>>> #ifndef __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>>>> #define __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>>>> ...
>>>> define in6_addr, sockaddr_in6, ipv6_mreq, whatnot
>>>> #endif
>>
>> Hmm, how should we handle future structs/enums then?
>> For example, if I want to have in6_flowlabel_req{} defined in
>> glibc, what should we do?
>
> Include the glibc header first?  Or is this some other
> use case?
>
> The point wasn't that you'd have only one macro for all
> structs/enums (you could split into __IPV6_IN6_ADDR_DEFINED,
> __IPV6_SOCKADDR_IN6_DEFINED, etc.) but to have the kernel
> and libc agree on guard macros, instead of having the kernel
> do #ifdef __GLIBC__ and glibc doing #ifdef _NETINET_IN_H.
>
> But as Carlos says, the devil is in the details, and
> I sure am not qualified on the details here.

My plan is to have one _UAPI_DEF_xxx macro to guard each
problematic definition in the kernel UAPI headers.

Then userspace can check for those macros and act appropriately.

The kernel likewise when detecting glibc headers included first
can use the _UAPI_DEF_xxx macro guards to disable problematic
definitions knowing that glibc has identical ABI and API-compatible
versions that the program can use without breaking.

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1580 bytes --]

On Friday 18 January 2013 09:36:35 Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 01/18/2013 02:24 PM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> >>>> It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into
> >>>> libc-compat.h, then you control userspace libc coordination from one
> >>>> file.
> >>> 
> >>> How about just deciding on a single macro/symbol both the
> >>> kernel and libc (any libc that needs this) define?  Something
> >>> like both the kernel and userland doing:
> >>> 
> >>> #ifndef __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
> >>> #define __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
> >>> ...
> >>> define in6_addr, sockaddr_in6, ipv6_mreq, whatnot
> >>> #endif
> > 
> > Hmm, how should we handle future structs/enums then?
> > For example, if I want to have in6_flowlabel_req{} defined in
> > glibc, what should we do?
> 
> Include the glibc header first?  Or is this some other
> use case?
> 
> The point wasn't that you'd have only one macro for all
> structs/enums (you could split into __IPV6_IN6_ADDR_DEFINED,
> __IPV6_SOCKADDR_IN6_DEFINED, etc.) but to have the kernel
> and libc agree on guard macros, instead of having the kernel
> do #ifdef __GLIBC__ and glibc doing #ifdef _NETINET_IN_H.
> 
> But as Carlos says, the devil is in the details, and
> I sure am not qualified on the details here.

i shipped some kernel header versions in Gentoo where the linux network 
headers would include the C library's header (as defined by POSIX) so the 
structs that were the same would only come from glibc.  the only reported 
breakage was due to defines that the kernel provided but glibc did not.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[YOSHIFUJI Hideaki]

Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
> index f79c372..a2b16a5 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,13 @@
>  
>  #include <linux/types.h>
>  
> +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will not 
> + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq. The
> + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the kernel
> + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
> + */
> +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
> +
>  /*
>   *	IPv6 address structure
>   */

This should be
#if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)

> @@ -30,12 +37,20 @@
>  struct in6_addr {
>  	union {
>  		__u8		u6_addr8[16];
> +#if !defined(__GLIBC__) \
> +    || (defined(__GLIBC__) && (defined(__USE_MISC) || defined(__USE_GNU))) \
> +    || defined(__KERNEL__)
>  		__be16		u6_addr16[8];
>  		__be32		u6_addr32[4];
> +#endif
>  	} in6_u;
> +#if !defined(__GLIBC__) \
> +    || (defined(__GLIBC__) && (defined(__USE_MISC) || defined(__USE_GNU))) \
> +    || defined(__KERNEL__)
>  #define s6_addr			in6_u.u6_addr8
>  #define s6_addr16		in6_u.u6_addr16
>  #define s6_addr32		in6_u.u6_addr32
> +#endif
>  };

2nd "if" be after s6_addr?

--yoshfuji

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 01/16/2013 10:22 PM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
>> index f79c372..a2b16a5 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/in6.h
>> @@ -23,6 +23,13 @@
>>
>>  #include <linux/types.h>
>>
>> +/* If a glibc-based userspace has already included in.h, then we will not
>> + * define in6_addr (nor the defines), sockaddr_in6, or ipv6_mreq. The
>> + * ABI used by the kernel and by glibc match exactly. Neither the kernel
>> + * nor glibc should break this ABI without coordination.
>> + */
>> +#ifndef _NETINET_IN_H
>> +
>>  /*
>>   *	IPv6 address structure
>>   */
>
> This should be
> #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)

Correct. If it's non-glibc we want these defines to be used
even if a non-glibc defined _NETINET_IN_H.

>> @@ -30,12 +37,20 @@
>>  struct in6_addr {
>>  	union {
>>  		__u8		u6_addr8[16];
>> +#if !defined(__GLIBC__) \
>> +    || (defined(__GLIBC__) && (defined(__USE_MISC) || defined(__USE_GNU))) \
>> +    || defined(__KERNEL__)
>>  		__be16		u6_addr16[8];
>>  		__be32		u6_addr32[4];
>> +#endif
>>  	} in6_u;
>> +#if !defined(__GLIBC__) \
>> +    || (defined(__GLIBC__) && (defined(__USE_MISC) || defined(__USE_GNU))) \
>> +    || defined(__KERNEL__)
>>  #define s6_addr			in6_u.u6_addr8
>>  #define s6_addr16		in6_u.u6_addr16
>>  #define s6_addr32		in6_u.u6_addr32
>> +#endif
>>  };
>
> 2nd "if" be after s6_addr?

Correct. We want to unconditinally define s6_addr in this case.

I've fixed both of those cases in the next version of the patch. Thanks.

Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[David Miller]

From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:47:12 +0000

> On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:21 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
>> Cong Wang wrote:
>> > (Cc'ing some glibc developers...)
>> > 
>> > Hello,
>> > 
>> > In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
>> > include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
>> > visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.
>> > 
>> > So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
>> > before.
> [...]
>> This is not a new issue.  In addition to this,
>> netinet/in.h also conflits with linux/in.h.
>> 
>> We might have
>>  #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)
>>  :
>>  #endif
>> around those conflicting definitions in uapi/linux/in{,6}.h.
> 
> This only solves half the problem, as <netinet/in.h> might be included
> after <linux/in.h>.  Also, not all Linux userland uses glibc.

So I've been looking at reasonable ways to fix this.

What would be really nice is if GCC treated multiple identical
definitions of structures the same way it handles multiple identical
definitions of CPP defines.  Which is to silently accept them.

But that's not the case, so we need a different solution.

Another thing to do is to use a new structure for in6_addr in kernel
headers exported to userland.

If we were to make the structure members and accessor macros identical
we could avoid breaking most if not all apps.

However the type name is different so:

	struct in6_addr *p = &kern_struct->member;

wouldn't work so well.  And you couldn't fix up the sources to these
kinds of accesses in a way that work cleanly both before and after
changing the kernel headers.

I'm out of ideas for today.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 01/16/2013 04:45 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:47:12 +0000
> 
>> On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:21 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
>>> Cong Wang wrote:
>>>> (Cc'ing some glibc developers...)
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> In glibc source file inet/netinet/in.h and kernel source file
>>>> include/uapi/linux/in6.h, both define struct in6_addr, and both are
>>>> visible to user applications. Thomas reported a conflict below.
>>>>
>>>> So, how can we handle this? /me is wondering why we didn't see this
>>>> before.
>> [...]
>>> This is not a new issue.  In addition to this,
>>> netinet/in.h also conflits with linux/in.h.
>>>
>>> We might have
>>>  #if !defined(__GLIBC__) || !defined(_NETINET_IN_H)
>>>  :
>>>  #endif
>>> around those conflicting definitions in uapi/linux/in{,6}.h.
>>
>> This only solves half the problem, as <netinet/in.h> might be included
>> after <linux/in.h>.  Also, not all Linux userland uses glibc.
> 
> So I've been looking at reasonable ways to fix this.
> 
> What would be really nice is if GCC treated multiple identical
> definitions of structures the same way it handles multiple identical
> definitions of CPP defines.  Which is to silently accept them.
> 
> But that's not the case, so we need a different solution.
> 
> Another thing to do is to use a new structure for in6_addr in kernel
> headers exported to userland.
> 
> If we were to make the structure members and accessor macros identical
> we could avoid breaking most if not all apps.
> 
> However the type name is different so:
> 
> 	struct in6_addr *p = &kern_struct->member;
> 
> wouldn't work so well.  And you couldn't fix up the sources to these
> kinds of accesses in a way that work cleanly both before and after
> changing the kernel headers.
> 
> I'm out of ideas for today.

So I just went down the rabbit hole, and the further I get the
closer I get to having two exact copies of the same definitions
in both glibc and the kernel and using whichever one was included
first.

Is anyone opposed to that kind of solution?

There is some ugliness there.

Cheers,
Carlos.
 

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[David Miller]

From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:58:47 -0500

> So I just went down the rabbit hole, and the further I get the
> closer I get to having two exact copies of the same definitions
> in both glibc and the kernel and using whichever one was included
> first.
> 
> Is anyone opposed to that kind of solution?

Sounds interesting, please share :-)

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Thursday 2013-01-17 03:05, David Miller wrote:

>From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>
>Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:58:47 -0500
>
>> So I just went down the rabbit hole, and the further I get the
>> closer I get to having two exact copies of the same definitions
>> in both glibc and the kernel and using whichever one was included
>> first.
>> 
>> Is anyone opposed to that kind of solution?
>
>Sounds interesting, please share :-)

iptables has the same issue, and solved it its way. 
(uapi/)linux/netfilter.h is used to get at things like union 
nf_inet_addr. This union contains struct in6_addr. There is no include 
for in6_addr in netfilter.h itself. This may break the "standalone 
compilation" test, but at least allows for specifying the 
environment-specific header for in6_addr in the C file:

a. userspace: #include <netinet/in.h> before <linux/netfilter.h>
b. kernel parts: #include <linux/in6.h> before <linux/netfilter.h>

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1034 bytes --]

On Wednesday 16 January 2013 16:45:11 David Miller wrote:
> What would be really nice is if GCC treated multiple identical
> definitions of structures the same way it handles multiple identical
> definitions of CPP defines.  Which is to silently accept them.
> 
> But that's not the case, so we need a different solution.
> 
> Another thing to do is to use a new structure for in6_addr in kernel
> headers exported to userland.

the kernel already exports many types with a __kernel_ prefix.  i changed the 
kernel headers in Gentoo for a few releases (2.6.28 - 2.6.34) to do the same 
thing to pretty much all the networking headers.  a few packages broke, but 
the number was low, and trivial to fix (a sed would do it most of the time).

it's also trivial for userland packages to detect that they need to do this 
sort of thing in a local header by using linux/version.h and a set of defines 
to redirect the new structure name back to the old one.

would be a lot cleaner to just break it and be done.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[David Miller]

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 23:14:31 -0500

> the kernel already exports many types with a __kernel_ prefix.  i changed the 
> kernel headers in Gentoo for a few releases (2.6.28 - 2.6.34) to do the same 
> thing to pretty much all the networking headers.  a few packages broke, but 
> the number was low, and trivial to fix (a sed would do it most of the time).
> 
> it's also trivial for userland packages to detect that they need to do this 
> sort of thing in a local header by using linux/version.h and a set of defines 
> to redirect the new structure name back to the old one.
> 
> would be a lot cleaner to just break it and be done.

We are not at liberty to break something that has legitimately
compiled successfully for two decades.

Your __kernel_ prefix idea breaks compilation just as equally.

One thing you certainly don't have to be is happy about this header
file situation, but you cannot use that dissatisfaction as
justification to make the situation worse by breaking the build for
people outside of the world you directly control.

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1683 bytes --]

On Thursday 17 January 2013 23:55:24 David Miller wrote:
> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> > the kernel already exports many types with a __kernel_ prefix.  i changed
> > the kernel headers in Gentoo for a few releases (2.6.28 - 2.6.34) to do
> > the same thing to pretty much all the networking headers.  a few
> > packages broke, but the number was low, and trivial to fix (a sed would
> > do it most of the time).
> > 
> > it's also trivial for userland packages to detect that they need to do
> > this sort of thing in a local header by using linux/version.h and a set
> > of defines to redirect the new structure name back to the old one.
> > 
> > would be a lot cleaner to just break it and be done.
> 
> We are not at liberty to break something that has legitimately
> compiled successfully for two decades.

i doubt there are code bases that have compiled successfully for that long 
w/out being changed.  in fact, the kernel user headers (until recently) have 
been a volatile mess requiring constant care & feeding of user programs to 
keep compiling.  if anything, this would simply be maintaining the status quo 
for a bit longer.

> One thing you certainly don't have to be is happy about this header
> file situation, but you cannot use that dissatisfaction as
> justification to make the situation worse by breaking the build for
> people outside of the world you directly control.

i think you're making wrong assumptions about my position on the topic.  i 
never said i was against cleaning up the kernel user headers (and in fact, you 
can find many commits from me doing exactly that over the years in the kernel).
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [libvirt] if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use

[Kumar Gala]

On Jan 14, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Eric Blake wrote:

> On 01/13/2013 01:05 PM, Thomas Backlund wrote:
>> Thomas Backlund skrev 13.1.2013 20:38:
>>> patch both inline and attached as thunderbird tends to mess up ...
>> 
>>> -----
>>> 
>>> if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h
>>> header.
>>> 
>>> Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.
>>> 
>> 
>> Ok,
>> ignore this patch, it's not the correct fix as it introduces
>> redefinitions...
>> 
>> Btw, the error that I hit that made me suggest this fix was libvirt
>> config check bailing out:
>> 
>> config.log:/usr/include/linux/if_bridge.h:173:20: error: field 'ip6' has
>> incomplete type
> 
> Hmm, just now noticing this thread, after independently hitting and and
> having to work around the same problem in libvirt:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2013-January/msg00930.html
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895141
> 
>>> --- linux-3.8-rc3/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h        2013-01-13
>>> 20:09:54.257271755 +0200
>>> +++ linux-3.8-rc3.fix/include/uapi/linux/if_bridge.h    2013-01-13
>>> 20:15:04.153676151 +0200
>>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>>>  #define _UAPI_LINUX_IF_BRIDGE_H
>>> 
>>>  #include <linux/types.h>
>>> +#include <linux/in6.h>
>>> 

Did this ever get resolved ?

- k

Re: [libvirt] if_bridge.h: include in6.h for struct in6_addr use

[Eric Blake]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 723 bytes --]

On 03/13/2013 09:17 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:

>>>>
>>>> if_bridge.h uses struct in6_addr ip6; but does not include the in6.h
>>>> header.
>>>>
>>>> Found by trying to build libvirt and connman against 3.8-rc3 headers.
>>>>
>>>

> Did this ever get resolved ?

Libvirt has managed to work around the kernel issue in the meantime.
But just today, I hit the same issue with the latest
kernel-headers-3.8.2-206.fc18.x86_64 on Fedora 18 when backporting to an
older libvirt branch that did not have the workaround.  A kernel person
would have to speak up for certain, but I think it is still a problem.

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 621 bytes --]