Hi, On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:35:30PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 01:43:04AM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: [...] > > diff --git a/include/netlink.h b/include/netlink.h > > index 3726171424c33..e7e4bbcfc0f51 100644 > > --- a/include/netlink.h > > +++ b/include/netlink.h > > @@ -119,10 +119,7 @@ extern int netlink_add_rule_batch(struct netlink_ctx *ctx, > > extern int netlink_del_rule_batch(struct netlink_ctx *ctx, > > const struct handle *h, > > const struct location *loc); > > -extern int netlink_replace_rule_batch(struct netlink_ctx *ctx, > > - const struct handle *h, > > - const struct rule *rule, > > - const struct location *loc); > > +extern int netlink_replace_rule_batch(struct netlink_ctx *ctx, struct cmd *cmd); > > This patch comes with an interesting cleanup, that is that you just > pass struct cmd as function parameter. > > Probably we can do this everywhere in the netlink.c code? I wonder if > it's better just to fix this without changing the function footprint. > Then, work a cleanup patch to update all netlink_* functions to pass > struct cmd as parameter. > > So we leave everything looking consistent. This change was necessary in order to pass the required parameters to cache_update(). Doing without, I would have to pass nf_sock, cache, obj and msgs fields additionally, and the number of parameters was already quite big. I would instead suggest to follow-up with a patch applying the change to all other functions as well, though I'm not sure whether Eric might make a voodoo doll which looks like me if I submit that now. [...] > > diff --git a/src/rule.c b/src/rule.c > > index 1bd5c80158b7b..ab19525757fff 100644 > > --- a/src/rule.c > > +++ b/src/rule.c > > @@ -1017,8 +1017,16 @@ static int do_command_add(struct netlink_ctx *ctx, struct cmd *cmd, bool excl) > > { > > uint32_t flags = excl ? NLM_F_EXCL : 0; > > > > - if (ctx->octx->echo) > > + if (ctx->octx->echo) { > > + int rc; > > Another nitpick: We seem to use 'int ret' everywhere in the code. So > probably for consistency, use this name here too. You mean if 'int err' is not used? But OK, in src/rule.c we have at least three cases of 'return ret' and only two of 'return rc' (from my patch) so I'll change that. Cheers, Phil -- 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