Remi Pommarel
2021-Dec-23 17:50 UTC
[Bridge] [PATCH net 2/2] net: bridge: Get SIOCGIFBR/SIOCSIFBR ioctl working in compat mode
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 08:59:44AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:> On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 16:31:39 +0100 Remi Pommarel wrote: > > In compat mode SIOC{G,S}IFBR ioctls were only supporting > > BRCTL_GET_VERSION returning an artificially version to spur userland > > tool to use SIOCDEVPRIVATE instead. But some userland tools ignore that > > and use SIOC{G,S}IFBR unconditionally as seen with busybox's brctl. > > > > Example of non working 32-bit brctl with CONFIG_COMPAT=y: > > $ brctl show > > brctl: SIOCGIFBR: Invalid argument > > > > Example of fixed 32-bit brctl with CONFIG_COMPAT=y: > > $ brctl show > > bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces > > br0 > > > > Signed-off-by: Remi Pommarel <repk at triplefau.lt> > > Co-developed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> > > Since Arnd said this is not supposed to be backported I presume it > should go to net-next?Yes, out of curiosity, is it appropriate to mix "[PATCH net]" and "[PATCH net-next]" in the same serie ? Thanks -- Remi
Jakub Kicinski
2021-Dec-23 17:53 UTC
[Bridge] [PATCH net 2/2] net: bridge: Get SIOCGIFBR/SIOCSIFBR ioctl working in compat mode
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 18:50:30 +0100 Remi Pommarel wrote:> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 08:59:44AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 16:31:39 +0100 Remi Pommarel wrote: > > > In compat mode SIOC{G,S}IFBR ioctls were only supporting > > > BRCTL_GET_VERSION returning an artificially version to spur userland > > > tool to use SIOCDEVPRIVATE instead. But some userland tools ignore that > > > and use SIOC{G,S}IFBR unconditionally as seen with busybox's brctl. > > > > > > Example of non working 32-bit brctl with CONFIG_COMPAT=y: > > > $ brctl show > > > brctl: SIOCGIFBR: Invalid argument > > > > > > Example of fixed 32-bit brctl with CONFIG_COMPAT=y: > > > $ brctl show > > > bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces > > > br0 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Remi Pommarel <repk at triplefau.lt> > > > Co-developed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> > > > > Since Arnd said this is not supposed to be backported I presume it > > should go to net-next? > > Yes, out of curiosity, is it appropriate to mix "[PATCH net]" and > "[PATCH net-next]" in the same serie ?It's not, mixing makes it quite hard to know what's needed where. Also hard to automate things on our end. Let me pick out the first patch, I'll be sending a PR to Linus shortly and then merge net into net-next. At which point you'll be able to rebase on top of net-next and resend just the second patch for net-next..