On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 12:56:05PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 11:10:40AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Máté Eckl <ecklm94@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:02:27AM +0200, Máté Eckl wrote: > > >> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 11:35:09PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > >> > It is now possible to build the nft_socket module as built-in when > > >> > NF_TABLES_IPV6 is disabled, and have NF_SOCKET_IPV6=m set manually. > > >> > > > >> > In this case, the NF_SOCKET_IPV6 functionality will be useless according > > >> > to the explanation in commit 35bf1ccecaaa ("netfilter: Kconfig: Change > > >> > IPv6 select dependencies"), but on top of that it also causes a link > > >> > error: > > >> > > > >> > net/netfilter/nft_socket.o: In function `nft_socket_eval': > > >> > nft_socket.c:(.text+0x162): undefined reference to `nf_sk_lookup_slow_v6' > > >> > > > >> > This changes the compile-time check so we don't attempt to use > > >> > the NF_SOCKET_IPV6 code when it cannot be used, and make it all > > >> > compile again. That may lead to unexpected behavior when a user > > >> > enables NF_SOCKET_IPV6 but cannot use it, but seems to be the > > >> > logical conclusion of the 35bf1ccecaaa change. > > >> > > > >> > Fixes: 35bf1ccecaaa ("netfilter: Kconfig: Change IPv6 select dependencies") > > >> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> > > >> > > >> I think this should be fixed in the Kconfig rather than inside the module(s). > > > > Should we revert your patch then, or do you have a better idea? > > Máté, would you resubmit a new patch that addresses all the problems > that Arnd is reporting in one go? This patch only solves the nf_socket and nft_socket modules problem so I can only submit a v2 for 'netfilter: Kconfig: Change IPv6 select dependencies' but you already applied it so it would meen a force push. Should I do this? I think Arnd's patch solves these problems in case we don't want to force-push or rebase. > I think it's better if we toss your original patch in the tree and > rebase, ie. take the new one that fixes all issues that Arnd is > reporting. It would be good if we can sort out this before I send the > next pull request for net-next stuff. > > I was afraid of fallout like this when I saw your original patch, > kbuild is always tricky. This patch is not related to the nft_tproxy module (it seems that you refer to that) as Arnd didn't have that in the tree when doing this. I'll send a v4 fot the tproxy module, but that cannot be related to this one as it is not in tree yet. > Please Cc Arnd, Florian and me for review. > > Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html