Re: [PATCH 01/13 RFC net-next] net: ipv4: introduce CONFIG_IPV4 to decouple the IPv4 stack
"Arnd Bergmann" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.linux.lvs.devel,gmane.linux.network,gmane.linux.drivers.rdma,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general,gmane.linux.scsi,gmane.linux.scsi.target.devel,gmane.linux.file-systems,gmane.linux.nfs,gmane.org.freifunk.batman,gmane.comp.security.firewalls.netfilter.devel,gmane.network.tipc.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, Jul 12, 2026, at 03:38, Fernando Fernandez Mancera wrote:
> Historically, the IPv4 protocol has been linked to the core INET
> subsystem. Because shared infrastructure like the TCP/UDP engine,
> routing or INET hashtables live inside net/ipv4/, it has been impossible
> to compile a kernel with only IPv6 support.
>
> This patch introduces the CONFIG_IPV4 Kconfig symbol, which is set to
> 'def_bool y' for now. This does not allow to completely disable the
> IPv4 stack yet but it lays the necessary build-system work for that
> goal.
I expect this will cause additional (trivial) build regression in the
next step when randconfig builds run into obscure corner cases, either
with INET=y IPV4=n IPV6=y or with INET=y IPV4=n IPV6=n.
I can probably give your patch (with IPV4 visible or disabled) an
early go on the randconfig tree to find these more quickly.
If I run into regressions, should I just add more 'depends on IPV4',
or do you have other plans?
Should we have some logic to ensure that at least one of IPV4 or
IPV6 is enabled? I think this would work
config IPV4
bool "The IPv4 protocol" if IPV6
default INET
which only allows turning IPV4 off if IPV6 has enabled.
Arnd