Re: CVS commit: src/sys/compat/netbsd32

[Simon Burge <simonb%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

Hi Roy,

Roy Marples wrote:

> On 15/01/2021 07:15, matthew green wrote:
> >> Oh, I quite agree. However, in6_nbrinfo predates my involvement with NetBSD
> >> and is the same struct on all BSD. While bringing the same functionality to
> >> IPv4, I elected to keep the same struct just to have the same API, warts
> >> and all. I like consistency.

Does anyone else have an in_nbrinfo?  I _think_ the "asked" member only
seems to get assigned a 0 for ipv4, and with a long being 32-bits on any
32 bit platform making it a long instead of an int doesn't buy anything.

I'm still keen to make this change (asked as an int instead of a long in
in_nbrinfo) and announce a mini flag day for arp for -current users so
that it's one less compat32 ioctl we have to maintain.

> > [ .. ]
> >> 
> >> That breaks API/ABI though yes? As such it would require stuff in compat
> >> anyway, but leaving it as it just needs n32 compat gunk instead which is
> >> less impactful on other systems.
> > 
> > in6_nbrinfo/in_nbrinfo are not in any published netbsd release so we can
> > choose to break them in -current.  there's a slight problem that -current has
> > a minor flag day here, but it's not the compat issue you seem to think.
>
> CVS disagrees - in6_nbrinfo is from NetBSD-1, only in_nbrinfo is recent:
> http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet6/nd6.h?rev=1.14.4.2&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=netbsd-1-5

Sorry, I only checked the history of in_nbrinfo and just assumed that
in6_nbrinfo was of a similar vintage.  I've committed compat32 support
for SIOCGNBRINFO_IN6 and in6_nbrinfo.

Cheers,
Simon.