Hi,
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 01:37:04PM +0100, Jeremy Sowden wrote:
> On 2019-07-16, at 21:39:03 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > BTW, not directly related to this, but isn't this strange?
> >
> > list_for_each_entry(cmd, cmds, list) {
> > memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
> > ctx.msgs = msgs;
> > ctx.seqnum = cmd->seqnum = mnl_seqnum_alloc(&seqnum);
> > ctx.batch = batch;
> > ctx.nft = nft;
> > init_list_head(&ctx.list);
> > ret = do_command(&ctx, cmd);
> > ...
> >
> > ctx is reset over and over again. Then, recycled here:
> >
> > ret = mnl_batch_talk(&ctx, &err_list, num_cmds);
> >
> > I wonder if we can get this better.
>
> Something like this?
>
> ...
> struct netlink_ctx ctx = { .msgs = msgs, .nft = nft };
> ...
>
> ctx.batch = batch = mnl_batch_init();
> batch_seqnum = mnl_batch_begin(batch, mnl_seqnum_alloc(&seqnum));
> list_for_each_entry(cmd, cmds, list) {
> ctx.seqnum = cmd->seqnum = mnl_seqnum_alloc(&seqnum);
> init_list_head(&ctx.list);
> ret = do_command(&ctx, cmd);
> ...
> }
Yes, that at least simplifies the foreach loop a bit. I wonder though
if we could eliminate struct netlink_ctx altogether by moving pointers
into struct nft_ctx.
Pablo, do you think that's feasible?
Cheers, Phil
