Greetings!
As the guilty party in authoring this, and also pretty new around here
I’m wondering what I need to do to help clean it up?
> On 19 Jun 2019, at 05:14, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 1:02 PM Masahiro Yamada
> <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:23 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> After merging the net-next tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>>
>>> In file included from usr/include/linux/tc_act/tc_ctinfo.hdrtest.c:1:
>>> ./usr/include/linux/tc_act/tc_ctinfo.h:30:21: error: implicit declaration of function 'BIT' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> CTINFO_MODE_DSCP = BIT(0),
>>> ^~~
>>> ./usr/include/linux/tc_act/tc_ctinfo.h:30:2: error: enumerator value for 'CTINFO_MODE_DSCP' is not an integer constant
>>> CTINFO_MODE_DSCP = BIT(0),
>>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> ./usr/include/linux/tc_act/tc_ctinfo.h:32:1: error: enumerator value for 'CTINFO_MODE_CPMARK' is not an integer constant
>>> };
>>> ^
>>>
>>> Caused by commit
>>>
>>> 24ec483cec98 ("net: sched: Introduce act_ctinfo action")
>>>
>>> Presumably exposed by commit
>>>
>>> b91976b7c0e3 ("kbuild: compile-test UAPI headers to ensure they are self-contained")
>>>
>>> from the kbuild tree.
Stephen, thanks for the fixup - is that now in the tree or do I need to submit
a fix via the normal net-next channel so it gets picked up by the iproute2 people
who maintain a local copy of the uapi includes?
>>
>>
>> My commit correctly blocked the broken UAPI header, Hooray!
>>
>> People export more and more headers that
>> are never able to compile in user-space.
>>
>> We must block new breakages from coming in.
>>
>>
>> BIT() is not exported to user-space
>> since it is not prefixed with underscore.
>>
>>
>> You can use _BITUL() in user-space,
>> which is available in include/uapi/linux/const.h
Thanks for the pointers.
I am confused as to why I didn’t hit this issue when I built & run tested locally off
the net-next tree.
>>
>>
>
>
> I just took a look at
> include/uapi/linux/tc_act/tc_ctinfo.h
>
>
> I just wondered why the following can be compiled:
>
> struct tc_ctinfo {
> tc_gen;
> };
>
>
> Then, I found 'tc_gen' is a macro.
>
> #define tc_gen \
> __u32 index; \
> __u32 capab; \
> int action; \
> int refcnt; \
> int bindcnt
>
>
>
> What a hell.
This is what other actions do e.g. tc_skbedit. Can you advise what I should do instead?
> --
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada
Many thanks to all for your valuable time & advice.
Cheers,
Kevin D-B
gpg: 012C ACB2 28C6 C53E 9775 9123 B3A2 389B 9DE2 334A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
