Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 17:27:10 -0600 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: Bryan Venteicher <bryanv@freebsd.org>, John Nielsen <lists@jnielsen.net> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r272886 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6 Message-ID: <54AC6F4E.1000707@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAGaYwLeDZ8Rz4N9Y_fcQH7r6ScQW%2B3prw3h5k9rxNibGvKJMMg@mail.gmail.com> References: <201410100609.s9A690NU067686@svn.freebsd.org> <C9D67F11-E922-477E-A9D6-7D2B8A139865@jnielsen.net> <CAGaYwLeDZ8Rz4N9Y_fcQH7r6ScQW%2B3prw3h5k9rxNibGvKJMMg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/6/2015 4:00 PM, Bryan Venteicher wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:52 PM, John Nielsen <lists@jnielsen.net > <mailto:lists@jnielsen.net>> wrote: > > Bryan- > > On Oct 10, 2014, at 12:09 AM, Bryan Venteicher <bryanv@freebsd.org > <mailto:bryanv@freebsd.org>> wrote: > > > Author: bryanv > > Date: Fri Oct 10 06:08:59 2014 > > New Revision: 272886 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/272886 > > > > Log: > > Add context pointer and source address to the UDP tunnel callback > > > > These are needed for the forthcoming vxlan implementation. The context > > pointer means we do not have to use a spare pointer field in the inpcb, > > and the source address is required to populate vxlan's forwarding table. > > > > While I highly doubt there is an out of tree consumer of the UDP > > tunneling callback, this change may be a difficult to eventually MFC. > > I noticed this comment while doing an MFC of vxlan to my local tree. > Do you think an MFC to 10-STABLE of this change (and vxlan > generally) will be feasible? Is there precedent for ABI changes like > this being sanctioned? Could symbol versioning help? > > > > I'd like to get some consensus on whether this commit is OK to MFC. With > this commit, vxlan should be an easy to MFC. Breaking ABI will potentially hurt packages. FreeBSD builds packages for the oldest supported release on a branch. If you break ABI in 10.2 while we are building packages for 10.1 then any packages using these interfaces may not work right or result in panics packages with kmods. Please consider that. > > > > > Phabricator: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D383 > > Reviewed by: gnn > > > > Modified: > > head/sys/netinet/sctputil.c > > head/sys/netinet/udp_usrreq.c > > head/sys/netinet/udp_var.h > > head/sys/netinet6/udp6_usrreq.c > > Thanks, > > JN > > -- Regards, Bryan Drewery
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54AC6F4E.1000707>