On 20/05/2020 18:32, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 06:31:05PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote: >> On 20/05/2020 18:21, Edward Cree wrote: >>> @@ -582,7 +590,7 @@ nf_flow_offload_rule_alloc(struct net *net, >>> const struct flow_offload_tuple *tuple; >>> struct nf_flow_rule *flow_rule; >>> struct dst_entry *other_dst; >>> - int err = -ENOMEM; >>> + int err = -ENOMEM, i; >>> >>> flow_rule = kzalloc(sizeof(*flow_rule), GFP_KERNEL); >>> if (!flow_rule) >> Whoops, this changebar isn't meant to be there. Somehow I missed >> the unused var warning when I built it, too. >> Drop this, I'll spin v4. > The nf_tables_offload.c update is missing, please include this in v4. Hmm. Rather than me trying to whack-a-mole all the places in netfilter that create actions... given that the other user is TC, which explicitly sets hw_stats, maybe I should instead make flow_rule_alloc() populate all the hw_stats with DONT_CARE? It certainly makes for a shorter patch, and makes it less likely that bugs will be introduced later when new action offloads get added to netfilter by forgetting to set hw_stats. And it means the patch doesn't rely on me knowing things about netfilter internals which I apparently don't. -ed
