On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 06:36:10PM +0100, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote:
> The commit bc543af ("ebtables-compat: fix segfault in rules w/o target")
> doesn't handle all possible cases of target printing, and ACCEPT is left
> behind.
>
> BTW, the logic of target (-j XXX) printing is a bit weird. This patch
> simplifies it.
>
> I assume:
> * cs->jumpto is only filled by nft_immediate.
> * cs->target is only filled by nft_target.
>
> So we end with these cases:
> * nft_immediate contains a 'standard' target (ACCEPT, DROP, CONTINUE, RETURN, chain)
> Then cs->jumpto contains the target already. We have the rule.
> * No standard target. If nft_target contains a target, try to load it.
> * Neither nft_target nor nft_immediate exist. Then, assume CONTINUE.
>
> The printing path is then straight forward: either cs.jumpto or cs.target
> contains the target.
>
> As there isn't support for target extensions yet, there is no way to test the
> nft_target (cs.target) path.
Not telling this is wrong, but I guess the resulting code to print the
target has to converge to what we have in iptables-compat (see
iptables/nft-ipv4.c). I mean, the handling should look similar. Could
you revisit that and make sure that this and the existing code
converge to the point? 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
