netdev - RE: [PATCH 1/9] netfilter: Create and use nf_hook

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CB15A10@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date:	Tue, 7 Apr 2015 14:27:22 +0000
From:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:	'David Miller' <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"pablo@...filter.org" <pablo@...filter.org>,
	"hannes@...essinduktion.org" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	"jiri@...nulli.us" <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/9] netfilter: Create and use nf_hook_state.

> Instead of passing a large number of arguments down into the nf_hook()
> entry points, create a structure which carries this state down through
> the hook processing layers.
> 
> This makes is so that if we want to change the types or signatures of
> any of these pieces of state, there are less places that need to be
> changed.

Should the structure be passed as a 'const foo *' ?
Or is that always too restrictive?

	David

--
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