From: Harald Welte <laforge@gnumonks.org>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Cc: network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ABI breakage in sctp_event_subscribe (was [PATCH net-next 0/4] sctp: add some missing events from rfc5061)
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 15:16:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200501131607.GU1294372@nataraja> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200419102536.GA4127396@nataraja>
Dear Linux SCTP developers,
On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 12:25:36PM +0200, Harald Welte wrote:
> this patchset (merged back in Q4/2019) has broken ABI compatibility, more
> or less exactly as it was discussed/predicted in Message-Id
> <20190206201430.18830-1-julien@arista.com>
> "[PATCH net] sctp: make sctp_setsockopt_events() less strict about the option length"
> on this very list in February 2019.
does the lack of any follow-up so far seems to indicate nobody considers
this a problem? Even without any feedback from the Linux kernel
developers, I would be curious to hear What do other SCTP users say.
So far I have a somewhat difficult time understanding that I would be
the only one worried about ABI breakage? If that's the case, I guess
it would be best to get the word out that people using Linux SCTP should
better make sure to not use binary packages but always build on the
system they run it on, to ensure kernel headers are identical.
I don't mean this in any cynical way. The point is either the ABI is
stable and people can move binaries between different OS/kernel
versions, or they cannot. So far the general assumption on Linux is you
can, but with SCTP you can not, so this needs to be clarified.
Regards,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge@gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-01 13:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-08 11:27 [PATCH net-next 0/4] sctp: add some missing events from rfc5061 Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:27 ` [PATCH net-next 1/4] sctp: add SCTP_ADDR_ADDED event Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:27 ` [PATCH net-next 2/4] sctp: add SCTP_ADDR_REMOVED event Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:27 ` [PATCH net-next 3/4] sctp: add SCTP_ADDR_MADE_PRIM event Xin Long
2019-10-08 11:27 ` [PATCH net-next 4/4] sctp: add SCTP_SEND_FAILED_EVENT event Xin Long
2019-10-09 18:13 ` [PATCH net-next 0/4] sctp: add some missing events from rfc5061 Neil Horman
2019-10-10 0:13 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-04-19 10:25 ` ABI breakage in sctp_event_subscribe (was [PATCH net-next 0/4] sctp: add some missing events from rfc5061) Harald Welte
2020-05-01 13:16 ` Harald Welte [this message]
2020-05-01 14:20 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2020-06-01 10:46 ` Harald Welte
2020-06-01 12:14 ` Neil Horman
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=20200501131607.GU1294372@nataraja \
--to=laforge@gnumonks.org \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lucien.xin@gmail.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).