On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:42:39PM +0800, fgao@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Gao Feng <fgao@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> When something failed in nf_tables_table_enable, it would unregister
> the chains. But the rollback codes are same as nf_tables_table_disable
> almostly, except there is one counter check.
> Now create one wrapper function to eliminate the duplicated codes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <fgao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> net/netfilter/nf_tables_api.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_tables_api.c b/net/netfilter/nf_tables_api.c
> index a019a87..28a0bd7 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/nf_tables_api.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_tables_api.c
> @@ -576,6 +576,27 @@ static int nf_tables_gettable(struct net *net, struct sock *nlsk,
> return err;
> }
>
> +static void _nf_tables_table_disable(struct net *net,
> + const struct nft_af_info *afi,
> + struct nft_table *table,
> + u32 cnt)
> +{
> + struct nft_chain *chain;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(chain, &table->chains, list) {
> + if (!nft_is_active_next(net, chain))
> + continue;
> + if (!(chain->flags & NFT_BASE_CHAIN))
> + continue;
> +
> + if (cnt-- == 0)
> + break;
> +
> + nf_unregister_net_hooks(net, nft_base_chain(chain)->ops,
> + afi->nops);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int nf_tables_table_enable(struct net *net,
> const struct nft_af_info *afi,
> struct nft_table *table)
> @@ -598,18 +619,8 @@ static int nf_tables_table_enable(struct net *net,
> }
> return 0;
> err:
> - list_for_each_entry(chain, &table->chains, list) {
> - if (!nft_is_active_next(net, chain))
> - continue;
> - if (!(chain->flags & NFT_BASE_CHAIN))
> - continue;
> -
> - if (i-- <= 0)
> - break;
> -
> - nf_unregister_net_hooks(net, nft_base_chain(chain)->ops,
> - afi->nops);
> - }
> + if (i)
> + _nf_tables_table_disable(net, afi, table, i);
> return err;
> }
>
> @@ -617,17 +628,7 @@ static void nf_tables_table_disable(struct net *net,
> const struct nft_af_info *afi,
> struct nft_table *table)
> {
> - struct nft_chain *chain;
> -
> - list_for_each_entry(chain, &table->chains, list) {
> - if (!nft_is_active_next(net, chain))
> - continue;
> - if (!(chain->flags & NFT_BASE_CHAIN))
> - continue;
> -
> - nf_unregister_net_hooks(net, nft_base_chain(chain)->ops,
> - afi->nops);
> - }
> + _nf_tables_table_disable(net, afi, table, U32_MAX);
^^^^^^^
While I think it's good to consolidate code, I don't like this.
Probably better something like this?
+static void nft_table_disable(struct net *net,
+ const struct nft_af_info *afi,
+ struct nft_table *table, int cnt)
+{
+ struct nft_chain *chain;
+
+ list_for_each_entry(chain, &table->chains, list) {
+ if (!nft_is_active_next(net, chain))
+ continue;
+ if (!(chain->flags & NFT_BASE_CHAIN))
+ continue;
+
+ nf_unregister_net_hooks(net, nft_base_chain(chain)->ops,
+ afi->nops);
+ if (cnt && --cnt == 0)
+ break;
+
+ }
+}
So you call:
nft_table_disable(net, afi, table, 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
