On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Florian Westphal wrote: > Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Florian Westphal wrote: > > > From a quick glance I don't see why we can't e.g. constify > > > nf_conntrack_l3/4_proto too. It is not going to be as simple > > > as just placing const everywhere, but I see no requirement for > > > having these writeable. > > > > I will take a look. > > Thanks. For the protos, the functions nf_ct_l3proto_register and nf_ct_l4proto_register_one update the nla_size field. I don't know how many structures reach these functions. julia > > nf_logger and nf_loginfo also look like constify candidates. > > If there is a way to add "const" qualifier to pointer-to-structs > that are not modified this would good as well to have IMO, if just > for purpose of documentation. For instance: > > +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c > @@ -1177,8 +1177,8 @@ void nf_conntrack_free(struct nf_conn *ct) > static noinline struct nf_conntrack_tuple_hash * > init_conntrack(struct net *net, struct nf_conn *tmpl, > const struct nf_conntrack_tuple *tuple, > - struct nf_conntrack_l3proto *l3proto, > - struct nf_conntrack_l4proto *l4proto, > + const struct nf_conntrack_l3proto *l3proto, > + const struct nf_conntrack_l4proto *l4proto, > > > (its only passed as arg to a function that expects > "const struct nf_conntrack_x *"). > > I think we have several (also non-static helpers) that > take "struct foo *" arg while they could use "const struct foo*" > instead. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
