Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Wednesday 2008-04-09 18:50, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Right. There is currently to my knowledge only a single
place where this happens, which is net/xfrm/xfrm_output.c.
All others explicitly pass AF_INET etc, and then would
simply pass NFPROTO_INET.
But you have a point, that doesn't sound ideal.
Unfortunately, as I said, we need to export these values
to userspace, so we can't have them depend on AF_MAX.
Another constraint is that they must not exceed 255
or they won't fit in nfgenmsg->nfgen_family.
Mhh tricky. I still would prefer to avoid AF_ARP ...
I would have been going for NFPROTO_ now, with a translation
table for use for things like the xfrm code.
We need to keep the INET/INET6 values identical anyway,
so there no need for translation here.
Should I change all AF_INET6 to NFPROTO_ in the same run
(i.e. mostly xt_[A-Za-z]*.c), or leave it as is?
If we introduce those values, they should be used everywhere.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
