From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C3BDC43214 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 09:05:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C19610A4 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 09:05:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245038AbhIBJGY (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Sep 2021 05:06:24 -0400 Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([62.96.220.36]:60104 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S244968AbhIBJGV (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Sep 2021 05:06:21 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EFDC204E0; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:22 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IYizrHnH6YJ5; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailout2.secunet.com (mailout2.secunet.com [62.96.220.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF4A52009B; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cas-essen-02.secunet.de (unknown [10.53.40.202]) by mailout2.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9CD680004A; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) by cas-essen-02.secunet.de (10.53.40.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:21 +0200 Received: from gauss2.secunet.de (10.182.7.193) by mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:21 +0200 Received: by gauss2.secunet.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C92931805E1; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:21 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:05:21 +0200 From: Steffen Klassert To: "Dmitry V. Levin" CC: Antony Antony , Herbert Xu , Christian Langrock , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 ipsec-next] xfrm: Add possibility to set the default to block if we have no policy Message-ID: <20210902090521.GF9115@gauss3.secunet.de> References: <20210331144843.GA25749@moon.secunet.de> <20210901151402.GA2557@altlinux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210901151402.GA2557@altlinux.org> X-ClientProxiedBy: cas-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.201) To mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: 2c86f778-e09b-4440-8b15-867914633a10 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 06:14:02PM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > > The following part of this patch is ABI break: > > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h b/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h > > index ffc6a5391bb7..6e8095106192 100644 > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h > > @@ -213,6 +213,11 @@ enum { > > XFRM_MSG_GETSPDINFO, > > #define XFRM_MSG_GETSPDINFO XFRM_MSG_GETSPDINFO > > > > + XFRM_MSG_SETDEFAULT, > > +#define XFRM_MSG_SETDEFAULT XFRM_MSG_SETDEFAULT > > + XFRM_MSG_GETDEFAULT, > > +#define XFRM_MSG_GETDEFAULT XFRM_MSG_GETDEFAULT > > + > > XFRM_MSG_MAPPING, > > #define XFRM_MSG_MAPPING XFRM_MSG_MAPPING > > __XFRM_MSG_MAX > > After this change, strace no longer builds with the following diagnostics: > > ../../../src/xlat/nl_xfrm_types.h:162:1: error: static assertion failed: "XFRM_MSG_MAPPING != 0x26" > 162 | static_assert((XFRM_MSG_MAPPING) == (0x26), "XFRM_MSG_MAPPING != 0x26"); Thanks for the report! In the meantime there is a fix proposed: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg764744.html