From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com (mail-wr0-f193.google.com [209.85.128.193]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB55A7821A for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2017 00:54:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr0-f193.google.com with SMTP id x23so16273090wrb.0 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:54:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4xpdCWLTxvpxkxpfWE0mx/SFnbA5KBPKEOZGDIslLM0=; b=liI7aI49+o/J8A6XOPRJ3OQFUGqels8Sn49rcVGpez83LUcOxW85YI4vSnoYYx5sII /OqfI7bOZNEPWg374Kgk7Q6WScUtOzPzdgExFREeSasK/GRRgMF7GNWrsT16tpwyVTwK Xg89g9Hb/dPNLt66ud7LpVTRS/9b2MsSJY7xqjjMGm32BQj0KAlGqOrHAGMLNDTjiWrC Qq4NieP9Vt3d3Ri5YuQ538JYZKyKxI4YsY9mcAhKBW4XIlC3PUBfJRhjQbvZFmP6pvu1 PqyJ1bWc+a8zJ6FwqBq42AeE4QVDuK+kX0D6Nhya3Cfayi6mQf2h3fGrSuE5RKPxg5iz aNNg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4xpdCWLTxvpxkxpfWE0mx/SFnbA5KBPKEOZGDIslLM0=; b=C2AcMjpZgzUTvtlvZNLth4Zq81QsFLw35kpsgwf8NYnZpNFD89FYgUpMrxasgUmwxR jc+Yn4TdMv+WaY9A2wAhdOcS5a8CZGhonJ1SSBPwvCxxZQUIU1m9yO2aTuPdIGqPC7u1 QGtmDKip2/KlUNhNIKEWPH1M0ia2o3fIaRLTprp+2u3+an478UCPtI3fWF9DV47eJMFc X7Z0e3NibiTLLB0D2YP44BbX4uof1TBCsQRPxIs00bG5yGEhHgWWSWpLC54hFsj8ho6J vIa/B/d8+DwsXc4hD8io0/7f9mM5AJLiUZrEq9l0SxH3ycXdMNS8TElS0k+qt2X0zjdt IGBA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxAQS5CvD2S7JUeiZ0mj3XpKBUL9srCBiAf4tFPO5vydQv5oCSL 0cG4+NnK7peODgAK1BPCOoTLVoJplQ== X-Received: by 10.28.153.213 with SMTP id b204mr6738217wme.96.1498265642255; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:54:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.176.170 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:54:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170623234109.GF28053@denix.org> References: <20170622151404.27496-1-git@andred.net> <1498214792.25895.23.camel@andred.net> <20170623141737.bksn4w2qbd7fyhzs@hiutale> <20170623234109.GF28053@denix.org> From: Andre McCurdy Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:54:01 -0700 Message-ID: To: Denys Dmytriyenko Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux-libc-headers: fix duplicate IFF_LOWER_UP DORMANT ECHO on musl X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 00:54:04 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 04:20:41PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 7:17 AM, wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'm chipping in since I've been messing with these things a bit in ups= tream >> > Linux kernel. >> > >> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 06:37:52AM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:46 AM, Andr=C3=A9 Draszik = wrote: >> >> > connman is not doing anything wrong here. >> >> > >> >> >> >> yes I am aware of this >> >> >> >> > The kernel is redefining IFF_LOWER_UP, because it thinks the libc d= oesn't >> >> > define it yet (and glibc doesn't). >> >> > >> >> > libc-compat.h is the way to solve these kind of issues. There also = is https: >> >> > //lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/12/238 which is very similar. I'll pick that= instead. >> >> > >> >> see the comment https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/16/121 >> >> that worries me for this patch >> > >> > I'm aware of those review comments but I have not seen any patches pos= ted which >> > fix the problem in some other way. Thus I would propose to apply these= patches >> > as a workaround until upstream fixes the issues. >> > >> > These header files do not change that often either. >> >> problem is you become incompatible ABI forever that worries me. > > +1 > >> However if bruce is fine to carry this patch as part of linux-yocto >> I might relent. It still will be hassle where folks will have to apply >> this patch to there kernels if they are building musl based systems. > > Don't forget that not everyone is using linux-yocto kernel! Neither is linux-libc-headers, so getting these musl patches into the linux-yocto kernel isn't going to change much... >> >> I am not questioning the correctness of patch too. But >> >> it would be better to get this patch accepted into kernel >> >> before applying to OE since these are kind of patches which >> >> you can get stuck with for life if upstream is not accepting it. >> > >> > Upstream-Status: Denied >> > >> > would be a correct marker for now I guess. >> >> I would rather see some progress made to get it resolved :) >> we need to actually remove glibc'ness completely from kernel. >> and this will fix itself. > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core