This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Redefinition of struct in6_addr in <netinet/in.h> and <linux/in6.h>

On 01/18/2013 02:24 PM, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:

>>>> It's simple enough to move all of the __GLIBC__ uses into libc-compat.h,
>>>> then you control userspace libc coordination from one file.
>>> How about just deciding on a single macro/symbol both the
>>> kernel and libc (any libc that needs this) define?  Something
>>> like both the kernel and userland doing:
>>> #ifndef __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>>> #define __IPV6_BITS_DEFINED
>>> ...
>>> define in6_addr, sockaddr_in6, ipv6_mreq, whatnot
>>> #endif
> Hmm, how should we handle future structs/enums then?
> For example, if I want to have in6_flowlabel_req{} defined in
> glibc, what should we do?

Include the glibc header first?  Or is this some other
use case?

The point wasn't that you'd have only one macro for all
structs/enums (you could split into __IPV6_IN6_ADDR_DEFINED,
__IPV6_SOCKADDR_IN6_DEFINED, etc.) but to have the kernel
and libc agree on guard macros, instead of having the kernel
do #ifdef __GLIBC__ and glibc doing #ifdef _NETINET_IN_H.

But as Carlos says, the devil is in the details, and
I sure am not qualified on the details here.

Pedro Alves

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]