2025. 01. 01. 23:46 keltezéssel, Florian Westphal írta:
egyszeregy@xxxxxxxxxxx <egyszeregy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:/* match info */ -struct xt_dscp_info { +struct xt_dscp_match_info {To add to what Jan already pointed out, such renames break UAPI, please don't do this. It could be done with compat ifdef'ry but I think its rather ugly, better to keep all uapi structure names as-is.
If i keep the original, maybe one of them will be in conflict between "match" and "target" structs name if i remember well (they go the same text). By the way original structs name are absolutely not following any good clean coding, they will be still ugly and they are hard to understand quickly in the code, what goes for "target" and what goes fot "match" codes. Why is it bad to step forward and accept a breaking change to gets a better clean code?
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); MODULE_AUTHOR("Marc Boucher <marc@xxxxxxx>"); -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Xtables: TCP MSS match"); +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Xtables: TCP Maximum Segment Size (MSS) adjustment/match"); MODULE_ALIAS("ipt_tcpmss"); MODULE_ALIAS("ip6t_tcpmss"); +MODULE_ALIAS("ipt_TCPMSS"); +MODULE_ALIAS("ip6t_TCPMSS");I think you should add MODULE_ALIAS("xt_TCPMSS") just in case, same for all other merged (== 'removed') module names, to the respective match (preserved) modules.
Do you mean in all of xt_*.c source, it can be appended by its own MODULE_ALIAS("xt_TCPMSS"), MODULE_ALIAS("xt_RATEEST") ... and so on? Can be kept old MODULE_ALIAS() names or they can be removed?
