Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Pierre Chifflier wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 05:28:38PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>>>>> +struct ulogd_unixsock_option_t {
>>>>>> + uint16_t option_id;
>>>>>> + uint16_t option_length;
>>>>>> + char option_value[0];
>>>>>> +} __attribute__((packed));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +#define ALIGN_SIZE 8
>>>>> Minor question: why align this to 64 bits?
>>>> I originally used an alignment to 32 bits, but Jan noticed it would
>>>> break if using options/values on 64 bits (and a test confirmed that). I
>>>> took 64 bits as the biggest allowed value for integers.
>>> I would need to look into this in more detail, not sure where the
>>> problem is. I think that you can use something like `struct nlattr' (see
>>> include/linux/netlink.h) and then nla_put() to add attributes in the TLV
>>> format (see lib/nlattr.c). Those are align-safe. I'm using something
>>> similar for conntrackd for the synchronization messages (src/build.c and
>>> src/parse.c).
>>>
>> Yes, this is very similar though NLA_ALIGNTO is set to 4 which will
>> cause problems with 64 bits integers.
>> The other way to solve this would be to read integers byte per byte,
>> like in [1], but I found this not very elegant (and is likely to be slow
>> compared to aligned access).
>>
>> Or do you have any preferred solution ? Maybe using nlattr + one special
>> function for dealing with 64 bits variables ?
>
> I'd suggest to add a function that reads the data in 4 byte
> quantities.
Would memcpy() be enough? If so, we can go back to the 4 bytes alignment.
--
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
