netdev - Re: [RFC v2 3/7] net: netfilter conntrack - add per-net functionality for SCTP protocol

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090316184536.GH7551@localhost>
Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:45:36 +0300
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, daniel.lezcano@...e.fr,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	xemul@...nvz.org, adobriyan@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/7] net: netfilter conntrack - add per-net
	functionality for SCTP protocol

[Patrick McHardy - Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 07:29:02PM +0100]
> Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> After playing a bit with ctrl tables (thought about additional
>> mapping set or say new sysctl helper structure, or even using
>> extra1 member from struct ctl_table as temporary index) -- you were 
>> right in your first propose on this patch. Iterative
>> fasion is only more or less convenient here indeed :)
>>
>> Patrick, take a look please on the snippet below (that is how
>> it looks now).
>> ...
>
>> +	for (i = SCTP_CONNTRACK_CLOSED; i < SCTP_CONNTRACK_MAX; i++)
>> +		sn->sysctl_table[i - 1].data = &sn->sctp_timeouts[i];
>
> That definitely looks nicer. Does this work (-1) for the other
> protocols as well?

Yes, it's allowable for TCP_CONNTRACK_ to use the same way
referring just fine, though we use only a subset of the enum
for sysctl table.

>
>> If such an approach is fine -- I will fix the TCP proto
>> as well. Btw, this two patches (SCTP and TCP) are only
>> involved in such a modification, are there some problems
>> with patches for UDP, UDPlite and ICMP protos?
>
> Its better than the macro and I don't really see a better way, so
> this is fine with me. About the other patches - I just stopped at
> SCTP since it was the first one I truely didn't like :)
>

Ah :) Then I update only these two patches (SCTP and TCP protos)
since other are not related in this. Or I could resend the whole
series excluding the patches you've already picked up. Just say
what would be more convenient for you.

	- Cyrill -
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html