Re: [Lksctp-developers] Re: SCTP config 2.5.70(-bk)

Jon Grimm (jgrimm2@us.ibm.com)
Tue, 03 Jun 2003 16:07:08 -0500


Hi Adrian,

Sorry for a bit of delay... We are away at an SCTP Interoperability
event.

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 09:53:04AM +0200, Margit Schubert-While wrote:
>
>
>>CONFIG_IPV6_SCTP__ is always being set to "y" even though
>>not selected (CONFIG_IPV6 not set)
>
>
> First, this doesn't do any harm since CONFIG_IPV6_SCTP__ alone doensn't
> result in anything getting compiled.
>
> But besides, it seems a bit broken.
>
> From net/sctp/Kconfig:
>
> <-- snip -->
>
> ...
>
> config IPV6_SCTP__
> tristate
> default y if IPV6=n
> default IPV6 if IPV6
>
> config IP_SCTP
> tristate "The SCTP Protocol (EXPERIMENTAL)"
> depends on IPV6_SCTP__
> ...
>
> <-- snip -->
>
>
> Semantically equivalent is the following for IPV6_SCTP__:
>
> config IPV6_SCTP__
> tristate
> default y if IPV6=n || IPV6=y
> default m if IPV6=m
>
>
> If it was intended to disallow a static IP_SCTP with a modular IPV6 it
> doesn't work: It's perfectly allowed to set IPV6=n and IP_SCTP=y and
> later compile and install a modular IPV6 for the same kernel.
>

Are you sure? I vaguely remember one of the network structs having
#ifdef'd fields for v6. Consequently, if one compiles first without,
but the tries later compiles/loads ipv6... bad things happen as the
kernel has a different concept of what the sock is.

>
> Could someone from the SCTP developers comment on the intentions behind
> IPV6_SCTP__ ?
>

Yes. The intent was to at least discourage a configuration that will
segfault.

Thanks,
jon

>
>
>>Margit
>
>
> cu
> Adrian
>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/