Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

tcp: fix build for rack/bbr with various combos of INET and INET6 defined
ClosedPublic

Authored by gallatin on Jul 7 2021, 4:16 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 11 2024, 10:29 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 8 2024, 12:22 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 8 2024, 12:22 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 8 2024, 12:11 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 21 2024, 4:11 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jan 2 2024, 10:18 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 23 2023, 12:24 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 13 2023, 4:16 PM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

I have my workstation configured to use the alternate TCP stacks (MK_EXTRA_TCP_STACKS=yes). When trying to address a report that my recent ktls commit (28d0a740dd9) broke the NOINET build, I stumbled across the fact that support for NOINET and NOINET6 has rotted in rack and bbr.

This change allows the alternate stacks to build cleanly with GENERIC, LINT-NOINET, LINT-NOINET6 and LINT-NOIP, that's all the combinations of no ip at all, ipv4 and ipv6

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

rrs added inline comments.
sys/netinet/tcp_stacks/rack.c
12093 ↗(On Diff #91938)

I am concerned that when you init the fsb, without inet/inet6 we still set r_fsb_inited. That may
make sense.. but I wonder if it would be better to *not* set that flag if there is no INET or INET6.

I guess you have tested this and I think such a configuration (no INET or INET6) is just plain stupid
so I guess I am being over nervous.. let those who config a stupid config get what they deserve (stupid
results) :)

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jul 7 2021, 4:21 PM
sys/netinet/tcp_stacks/rack.c
12093 ↗(On Diff #91938)

I guess the question is: how could this code even run with neither INET nor INET6 compiled in? There would be nothing to call it..

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.