Hi Feng,
2016-09-02 9:48 GMT+08:00 <fgao@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> From: Gao Feng <fgao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> @@ -171,6 +176,11 @@ int nf_ct_seq_adjust(struct sk_buff *skb,
> struct nf_ct_seqadj *this_way, *other_way;
> int res;
>
> + if (unlikely(!seqadj)) {
IPS_SEQ_ADJUST_BIT will be tested before we call nf_ct_seq_adjust(),
so I think seqadj
will never be NULL here.
> + WARN_ONCE(1, "Missing nfct_seqadj_ext_add() setup call\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> this_way = &seqadj->seq[dir];
> other_way = &seqadj->seq[!dir];
>
> @@ -218,8 +228,10 @@ s32 nf_ct_seq_offset(const struct nf_conn *ct,
> struct nf_conn_seqadj *seqadj = nfct_seqadj(ct);
> struct nf_ct_seqadj *this_way;
>
> - if (!seqadj)
> + if (unlikely(!seqadj)) {
> + WARN_ONCE(1, "Missing nfct_seqadj_ext_add() setup call\n");
But in nf_ct_seq_offset, seqadj is likely to be NULL, see the function
call path:
tcp_packet->tcp_in_window->nf_ct_seq_offset, so WARN_ONCE seems unnecessary.
> return 0;
> + }
--
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
