From: David Lebrun <david.lebrun@uclouvain.be>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <lorenzo@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: sr: fix IPv6 initialization failure without lwtunnels
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 20:59:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5828C619.2020008@uclouvain.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161113.002348.81553025732356797.davem@davemloft.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1929 bytes --]
On 11/13/2016 06:23 AM, David Miller wrote:
> This seems like such a huge mess, quite frankly.
>
> IPV6-SR has so many strange dependencies, a weird Kconfig option that is
> simply controlling what a responsible sysadmin should be allow to do if
> he chooses anyways.
>
> Every distribution is going to say "¯\_(ツ)_/¯" and just turn the thing
> on in their builds.
Indeed, the issue is that seg6_iptunnel.o was included in obj-y instead
of ipv6-y, triggering the bug when CONFIG_IPV6=m. Fixed with the
following modification to the patch (tested with allyesconfig and
allmodconfig):
diff --git a/net/ipv6/Makefile b/net/ipv6/Makefile
index 8979d53..a233136 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/Makefile
+++ b/net/ipv6/Makefile
@@ -53,6 +53,6 @@ obj-$(subst m,y,$(CONFIG_IPV6)) += inet6_hashtables.o
ifneq ($(CONFIG_IPV6),)
obj-$(CONFIG_NET_UDP_TUNNEL) += ip6_udp_tunnel.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_LWTUNNEL) += seg6_iptunnel.o
+ipv6-$(CONFIG_LWTUNNEL) += seg6_iptunnel.o
obj-y += mcast_snoop.o
endif
I agree with you that the way to combine the dependencies is strange,
even if they are very few. The part of the IPv6-SR patch that is enabled
by default depends on two things: IPV6 and LWTUNNEL. The problem is that
LWTUNNEL does not depend on IPV6 and is not necessarily enabled. To fix
the bug reported by Lorenzo, I propose to select one the three following
solutions:
1. Make LWTUNNEL always enabled (removing the option).
Pros: remove an option
Cons: add always-enabled code
2. Create an option IPV6_SEG6_LWTUNNEL, which would select LWTUNNEL and
enable the compilation of seg6_iptunnel.o.
Pros: logically dissociate the part of IPv6-SR that depends on
LWTUNNEL from the core patch and simplifies compilation
Cons: add an option
3. Apply the proposed patch with the fix
Pros: do not modify options
Cons: weird conditional compilation
What do you think ?
David
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 163 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-13 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-08 13:57 [PATCH net-next v5 0/9] net: add support for IPv6 Segment Routing David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:57 ` [PATCH net-next v5 1/9] ipv6: implement dataplane support for rthdr type 4 (Segment Routing Header) David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:57 ` [PATCH net-next v5 2/9] ipv6: sr: add code base for control plane support of SR-IPv6 David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:57 ` [PATCH net-next v5 3/9] ipv6: sr: add support for SRH encapsulation and injection with lwtunnels David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:57 ` [PATCH net-next v5 4/9] ipv6: sr: add core files for SR HMAC support David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:59 ` [PATCH net-next v5 5/9] ipv6: sr: implement API to control SR HMAC structure David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:59 ` [PATCH net-next v5 6/9] ipv6: sr: add calls to verify and insert HMAC signatures David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:59 ` [PATCH net-next v5 7/9] ipv6: add source address argument for ipv6_push_nfrag_opts David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:59 ` [PATCH net-next v5 8/9] ipv6: sr: add support for SRH injection through setsockopt David Lebrun
2016-11-08 13:59 ` [PATCH net-next v5 9/9] ipv6: sr: add documentation file for per-interface sysctls David Lebrun
2016-11-10 1:40 ` [PATCH net-next v5 0/9] net: add support for IPv6 Segment Routing David Miller
2016-11-10 8:19 ` David Lebrun
2016-11-10 14:45 ` David Miller
2016-11-10 8:35 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2016-11-10 9:09 ` David Lebrun
2016-11-10 9:14 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2016-11-10 9:26 ` David Lebrun
2016-11-10 9:27 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2016-11-10 9:55 ` [PATCH net-next] ipv6: sr: fix IPv6 initialization failure without lwtunnels David Lebrun
2016-11-10 11:20 ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-10 12:32 ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-10 12:26 ` [PATCH net-next v2] " David Lebrun
2016-11-13 5:20 ` David Miller
2016-11-13 5:23 ` David Miller
2016-11-13 19:59 ` David Lebrun [this message]
2016-11-14 14:22 ` Roopa Prabhu
2016-11-15 10:17 ` David Lebrun
2016-11-15 15:18 ` David Miller
2016-11-16 15:49 ` Roopa Prabhu
2016-11-16 16:31 ` David Miller
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=5828C619.2020008@uclouvain.be \
--to=david.lebrun@uclouvain.be \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=lorenzo@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).