[Patrick McHardy - Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 07:29:02PM +0100] > Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >> After playing a bit with ctrl tables (thought about additional >> mapping set or say new sysctl helper structure, or even using >> extra1 member from struct ctl_table as temporary index) -- you were >> right in your first propose on this patch. Iterative >> fasion is only more or less convenient here indeed :) >> >> Patrick, take a look please on the snippet below (that is how >> it looks now). >> ... > >> + for (i = SCTP_CONNTRACK_CLOSED; i < SCTP_CONNTRACK_MAX; i++) >> + sn->sysctl_table[i - 1].data = &sn->sctp_timeouts[i]; > > That definitely looks nicer. Does this work (-1) for the other > protocols as well? Yes, it's allowable for TCP_CONNTRACK_ to use the same way referring just fine, though we use only a subset of the enum for sysctl table. > >> If such an approach is fine -- I will fix the TCP proto >> as well. Btw, this two patches (SCTP and TCP) are only >> involved in such a modification, are there some problems >> with patches for UDP, UDPlite and ICMP protos? > > Its better than the macro and I don't really see a better way, so > this is fine with me. About the other patches - I just stopped at > SCTP since it was the first one I truely didn't like :) > Ah :) Then I update only these two patches (SCTP and TCP protos) since other are not related in this. Or I could resend the whole series excluding the patches you've already picked up. Just say what would be more convenient for you. - Cyrill - -- 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
