On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:33:45AM -0200, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote: > On 22-10-2014 10:02, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > >On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 07:58:03PM -0200, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote: > >>Currently, despite the comment right before the function, > >>nf_log_register allows registering two loggers on with the same type and > >>end up overwriting the previous register. > >> > >>Not a real issue today as current tree doesn't have two loggers for the > >>same type but it's better to get this protected. > >> > >>Also make sure that all of its callers do error checking. > > > >No major objetions to this sanity check. Some comment below. > > > >>Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <mleitner@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>--- > >> > >>Notes: > >> Please let me know if you have any issues with the identation on > >> nf_log_register. I just couldn't find a better one. > > > >You can split nf_log_register() in two functions to avoid this. > > Sorry but I don't follow this one. You mean having the check on > nf_log_register() and then calling a __nf_log_register() to actually > register it? > > Now I'm thinking on wrapping > rcu_dereference_protected(loggers[i][logger->type], > + lockdep_is_held(&nf_log_mutex)) > into a macro or something like that, because that's the issue in > there and this construction is called several times. Something like: > > #define logger_deref_protected(pf, type) \ > rcu_dereference_protected(loggers[pf][type], \ > lockdep_is_held(&nf_log_mutex)); > > WDYT? Seems OK, I think this can be: #define nft_log_dereference(logger) So you can use this both from net->nf.nf_loggers[x] and loggers[x][y] and we have one single macro and we avoid the indent issues. Thanks. -- 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
