Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-86879-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3fcf3a2c-1c1b-42c1-bacb-78fdcd700389@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <85b78dad-affa-47c3-9cd0-79a4321460b8@linux.dev> <CANn89iJEzTjwxF7wXSnUR+NyDu-S-zEOYVXA+fEaYs_1o1g5HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <a1fdd2c2-4443-458e-86db-280e7cbd4a36@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CANn89iKdaMFCKnGRL4ffnbyrr2PUaKn1hoiu4VZ=sRyX=Vy0Wg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240229064742.36c2f476@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20240229064742.36c2f476@kernel.org>
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:53:20 +0100
Message-ID: <CANn89i+4Q2L7Gd5zGrSwT_v2wjL-ZKEFcM=oQ9w090+xc57HTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [revert 0d60d8df6f49] [net/net-next] [6.8-rc5] Build Failure
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Tasmiya Nalatwad <tasmiya@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>, 
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com, 
	jiri@nvidia.com, "abdhalee@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <abdhalee@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, 
	"mputtash@linux.vnet.com" <mputtash@linux.vnet.com>, "sachinp@linux.vnet.com" <sachinp@linux.vnet.com>, 
	venkat88@linux.vnet.ibm.com, 
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 3:47=E2=80=AFPM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wr=
ote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 09:55:22 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > I do not see other solution than this, otherwise we have to add more
> > pollution to include/linux/netdevice.h
>
> Right :(
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > index a9c973b92294bb110cf3cd336485972127b01b58..40797ea80bc6273cae6b777=
3d0a3e47459a72150
> > 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > @@ -2469,7 +2469,7 @@ struct net_device {
> >         struct devlink_port     *devlink_port;
> >
> >  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DPLL)
> > -       struct dpll_pin __rcu   *dpll_pin;
> > +       void __rcu *dpll_pin;
> >  #endif
>
> If DPLL wants to hide its type definitions the helpers must live
> in dpll? IOW move netdev_dpll_pin() to drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c

Oh for some reason I thought this stuff was a module.

Otherwise, why having dpll 'core' helpers in net/core/dev.c