On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 04:52:11PM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
> From: Gao feng <gaofeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> the struct nf_proto_net stroes proto's ctl_table_header and ctl_table,
> nf_ct_l4proto_(un)register_sysctl use it to register sysctl.
>
> there are some changes for struct nf_conntrack_l4proto:
> - add field compat to identify if this proto should do compat.
> - the net_id field is used to store the pernet_operations id
> that belones to l4proto.
> - init_net will be used to initial the proto's pernet data
>
> and add init_net for struct nf_conntrack_l3proto too.
This patchset looks bette but there are still things that we have to
resolve.
The first one (regarding this patch 1/17) changes in:
* include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l4proto.h
* include/net/netns/conntrack.h
should be included in:
[PATCH] netfilter: add namespace support for l4proto
And changes in:
* include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l3proto.h
should be included in:
[PATCH] netfilter: add namespace support for l3proto
I already told you. A patch that adds a structure without using it,
is not good. The structure has to go together with the code uses it.
More comments below.
> Acked-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Gao feng <gaofeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l3proto.h | 3 +++
> include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l4proto.h | 6 ++++++
> include/net/netns/conntrack.h | 12 ++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l3proto.h b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l3proto.h
> index 9699c02..9766005 100644
> --- a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l3proto.h
> +++ b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l3proto.h
> @@ -69,6 +69,9 @@ struct nf_conntrack_l3proto {
> struct ctl_table *ctl_table;
> #endif /* CONFIG_SYSCTL */
>
> + /* Init l3proto pernet data */
> + int (*init_net)(struct net *net);
> +
> /* Module (if any) which this is connected to. */
> struct module *me;
> };
> diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l4proto.h b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l4proto.h
> index 3b572bb..a90eab5 100644
> --- a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l4proto.h
> +++ b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l4proto.h
> @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ struct nf_conntrack_l4proto {
> /* L4 Protocol number. */
> u_int8_t l4proto;
>
> + u_int8_t compat;
I don't see why we need this new field.
It seems to be set to 1 in each structure that has set:
.ctl_compat_table
to non-NULL. So, it's redundant.
Moreover, you already know from the protocol tracker itself if you
have to allocate the compat ctl table or not.
In other words: You set compat to 1 for nf_conntrack_l4proto_generic.
Then, you pass that compat value to generic_init_net via ->inet_net
again, but this information (that determines if the compat has to be
done or not) is already in the scope of the protocol tracker.
You have to fix this.
> +
> /* Try to fill in the third arg: dataoff is offset past network protocol
> hdr. Return true if possible. */
> bool (*pkt_to_tuple)(const struct sk_buff *skb, unsigned int dataoff,
> @@ -103,6 +105,10 @@ struct nf_conntrack_l4proto {
> struct ctl_table *ctl_compat_table;
> #endif
> #endif
> + int *net_id;
> + /* Init l4proto pernet data */
> + int (*init_net)(struct net *net, u_int8_t compat);
> +
> /* Protocol name */
> const char *name;
>
> diff --git a/include/net/netns/conntrack.h b/include/net/netns/conntrack.h
> index a053a19..1f53038 100644
> --- a/include/net/netns/conntrack.h
> +++ b/include/net/netns/conntrack.h
> @@ -8,6 +8,18 @@
> struct ctl_table_header;
> struct nf_conntrack_ecache;
>
> +struct nf_proto_net {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL
> + struct ctl_table_header *ctl_table_header;
> + struct ctl_table *ctl_table;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_PROC_COMPAT
> + struct ctl_table_header *ctl_compat_header;
> + struct ctl_table *ctl_compat_table;
> +#endif
> +#endif
> + unsigned int users;
> +};
> +
> struct netns_ct {
> atomic_t count;
> unsigned int expect_count;
--
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
