Hello
>
>On Monday 2011-11-07 01:52, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>> +static __u32 get_hash(struct sk_buff *skb, struct xt_hmark_info *info)
>>> +{
>>> + int nhoff, hash = 0, poff, proto, frag = 0;
>>> + struct iphdr *ip;
>>> + u8 ip_proto;
>>> + u32 addr1, addr2, ihl;
>>> + u16 snatport = 0, dnatport = 0;
>>> + union {
>>> + u32 v32;
>>> + u16 v16[2];
>>> + } ports;
>>> +
>>> + nhoff = skb_network_offset(skb);
>>> + proto = skb->protocol;
>>> +
>>> + if (!proto && skb->sk) {
>>> + if (skb->sk->sk_family == AF_INET)
>>> + proto = __constant_htons(ETH_P_IP);
>>> + else if (skb->sk->sk_family == AF_INET6)
>>> + proto = __constant_htons(ETH_P_IPV6);
>>
>>You already have the layer3 protocol number in xt_action_param. No
>>need to use the socket information then.
>
>xt_action_param.family (NFPROTO_) is not the same class af AF_ or ETH_.
>Though, wouldn't proto = skb->proto; just be simpler here?
Well it's not always set ...
I think I will split the get_hash() into get_ipv4_hash() and get_ipv6_hash()
as Pablo suggest in prev mail.
In that case it would be no cost to use xt_action_param ->family to separate IPv6 / 4
Thanks
Hans
--
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
