Re: Should we move IPVS out of net/ipv4 now?

To: "David Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Should we move IPVS out of net/ipv4 now?
Cc: horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx, csnook@xxxxxxxxxx, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Julius Volz" <juliusv@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:47:13 +0200
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:00 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 09:52:22 +1000
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:04:28PM +0200, Julius Volz wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 10:14 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> > > From: Chris Snook <csnook@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:37:33 -0400
>> > >
>> > >> Julius Volz wrote:
>> > >> > Since IPVS now does partial IPv6, should we finally move it from
>> > >> > "net/ipv4/ipvs" to "net" or to "net/netfilter"? I posted that patch a
>> > >> > long time ago, but that was before any of the actual v6 features, so
>> > >> > there was probably no interest.
>> > >>
>> > >> Whatever the netfilter people want is fine with me.
>> > >
>> > > I think, especially in the long term, putting IPVS under net/netfilter/
>> > > is the right thing to do.
>> >
>> > Ok thanks, I'll send the patch for that once lvs-next-2.6 or
>> > net-next-2.6 builds for ARCH=um again (there seems to be some breakage
>> > at the moment)...
>> Once net-next-2.6 is working again, let me know and I'll pull it
>> into lvs-next-2.6.
> I can't fix this if people don't tell me what the problem is.

Sorry, I sent this from an environment where I didn't have the
information and just wanted to give a quick ACK on the IPVS move

The build with ARCH=um seems to have a problem with the
architecture-specific headers:

net/core/skb_dma_map.c: In function 'skb_dma_map':
net/core/skb_dma_map.c:20: error: implicit declaration of function

The bad commit that introduces the skb_dma_map.c file (and this error)
is a40c24a1336. Previous versions build fine.

> Is there some upstream fix and cures this and all I need to do is
> sync net-next-2.6 up with Linus's tree?  Is there some external
> fix?

Linus' linux-2.6 (he doesn't have a linux-next-2.6, right?) works, but
that doesn't even contain the file that has the build problem.

> It's totally stupid to stall development because of an issue like this
> yet give no direction or diagnostics we can use as a path to resolve
> it.

Yes, I'll give a better report next time.


Julius Volz - Corporate Operations - SysOps

Google Switzerland GmbH - Identification No.: CH-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>