On Friday 2010-07-23 19:30, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> >+
>> >+static const struct option cpu_opts[] = {
>> >+ { "cpu", 1, NULL, '1' },
>> >+ { .name = NULL }
>> >+};
>>
>> I will never understand that sort of style mix logic. Why the
>> C99 initializer only on the sentinel?
>>
>> {
>> {.name = "cpu", .has_arg = true, .val = '1'},
>> {NULL},
>> };
>>
>
>copy/paste from another module ?
>
>
>> >diff --git a/extensions/libxt_cpu.man b/extensions/libxt_cpu.man
>> >index e69de29..f42ac7a 100644
>> >--- a/extensions/libxt_cpu.man
>> >+++ b/extensions/libxt_cpu.man
>> >@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
>> >+.TP
>> >+[\fB!\fP] \fB\-\-cpu\fP \fInumber\fP
>> >+
>> >+Match cpu handling this packet. cpus are numbered from 0 to NR_CPUS-1
>>
>> Unwanted blank line.
>>
>> >+Can be used in combination with RPS (Remote Packet Steering) or
>> >+multiqueue NICS to spread network traffic on different queues.
>> >+.PP
>> >+Example:
>> >+.PP
>> >+iptables \-t nat \-A PREROUTING \-p tcp \-\-dport 80 \-m cpu \-\-cpu 0
>> >+ \-j REDIRECT \-\-to\-port 8080
>>
>> Unwanted indent.
>>
>> >+.PP
>> >+iptables \-t nat \-A PREROUTING \-p tcp \-\-dport 80 \-m cpu \-\-cpu 1
>> >+ \-j REDIRECT \-\-to\-port 8081
>> >+.PP
>> >+Available since linux 2.6.36
>>
>> Linux.
>
>
>OK ;)
>
>I'll provide a cleanup patch, not only to xt_cpu but all other iptables
>modules that dont meet your coding style requirements ;)
Well nah I'm already on it myself, given Patrick has already imported the
patches.
--
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
