Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 7/9] net/netfilter: Add unstable CT lookup helpers for XDP and TC-BPF

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 09:01:29PM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 08:39:14PM IST, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 06:32:28PM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
>> > [...]
>> > >  net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c | 252 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> > >  7 files changed, 497 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> > >
>> > [...]
>> > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
>> > > index 770a63103c7a..85042cb6f82e 100644
>> > > --- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
>> > > +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
>> >
>> > Please, keep this new code away from net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c
>> 
>> Ok. Can it be a new file under net/netfilter, or should it live elsewhere?
>
> IPVS and OVS use conntrack for already quite a bit of time and they
> keep their code in their respective folders.

Those are users, though. This is adding a different set of exported
functions, like a BPF version of EXPORT_SYMBOL(). We don't put those
outside the module where the code lives either...

I can buy not wanting to bloat nf_conntrack_core.c, but what's the
problem with adding a net/netfilter_nf_conntrack_bpf.c that gets linked
into the same kmod?

-Toke




[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux