On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 17:49, Jan Engelhardt<jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 2009-09-02 17:36, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>
>>> Nice, I'll use par->family.
>>>
>>> So in theory I do not even need a check like the following in the beginning?
>>>
>>> if (family != NFPROTO_IPV4
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6
>>> && family != NFPROTO_IPV6
>>> #endif
>>> ) {
>>> match = false;
>>> goto out;
>>> }
>>
>>With the AF_UNSPEC registration of your match, it might be used
>
> par->family always contains the NFPROTO of the invoking implementation,
> which can never be UNSPEC (except, in future, xtables2 ;-)
>
> par->match->family however may be UNSPEC if the module works that way.
> Which is why we have par->family.
>
I'll a check_entry function:
static bool ipvs_mt_check(const struct xt_mtchk_param *par)
{
if (par->family != NFPROTO_IPV4
#ifdef CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6
&& par->family != NFPROTO_IPV6
#endif
)
return false;
return true;
}
and remove the runtime check in ipvs_mt.
--
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
