![]() |
lvs-devel
|
| To: | Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 1/3] netfilter: xt_ipvs (netfilter matcher for IPVS) |
| Cc: | Hannes Eder <heder@xxxxxxxxxx>, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Fabien Duchêne <mad_fab@xxxxxxxxx>, Jean-Luc Fortemaison <jl.fortemaison@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>, Julius Volz <julius.volz@xxxxxxxxx>, Laurent Grawet <laurent.grawet@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wensong Zhang <wensong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| From: | Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 2 Sep 2009 17:49:40 +0200 (CEST) |
On Wednesday 2009-09-02 17:36, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>
>> Nice, I'll use par->family.
>>
>> So in theory I do not even need a check like the following in the beginning?
>>
>> if (family != NFPROTO_IPV4
>> #ifdef CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6
>> && family != NFPROTO_IPV6
>> #endif
>> ) {
>> match = false;
>> goto out;
>> }
>
>With the AF_UNSPEC registration of your match, it might be used
par->family always contains the NFPROTO of the invoking implementation,
which can never be UNSPEC (except, in future, xtables2 ;-)
par->match->family however may be UNSPEC if the module works that way.
Which is why we have par->family.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 1/3] netfilter: xt_ipvs (netfilter matcher for IPVS), Patrick McHardy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 1/3] netfilter: xt_ipvs (netfilter matcher for IPVS), Hannes Eder |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 1/3] netfilter: xt_ipvs (netfilter matcher for IPVS), Patrick McHardy |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 1/3] netfilter: xt_ipvs (netfilter matcher for IPVS), Hannes Eder |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |