IPMARK nfcache

IPMARK nfcache

[Alexander Samad]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2456 bytes --]

Hi

Recently went to path IPMARK (Patchlet from patch o matic) to a 2.6.14
source tree and I have noticed this compilation error

net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c: In function 'target':
net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c:36: error: 'struct sk_buff' has no
member named 'nfcache'
net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c:36: error: 'NFC_ALTERED' undeclared
(first use in this function)
net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c:36: error: (Each undeclared identifier
is reported only once
net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c:36: error: for each function it appears
in.)

on investigation the nfcache field from sk_buff has been removed, having
a look on the net as to why

I was wondering what mechanism is need to replace the 'ncfcache |
NFC_ALTERED' statement


Seem like it has been killed - gives me the impression I can remove this
line with no bad side effects ?

commit 6869c4d8e066e21623c812c448a05f1ed931c9c6
Author: Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>
Date:   Tue Aug 9 19:24:19 2005 -0700

    [NETFILTER]: reduce netfilter sk_buff enlargement
    
    As discussed at netconf'05, we're trying to save every bit in
sk_buff.
    The patch below makes sk_buff 8 bytes smaller.  I did some basic
    testing on my notebook and it seems to work.
    
    The only real in-tree user of nfcache was IPVS, who only needs a
    single bit.  Unfortunately I couldn't find some other free bit in
    sk_buff to stuff that bit into, so I introduced a separate field for
    them.  Maybe the IPVS guys can resolve that to further save space.
    
    Initially I wanted to shrink pkt_type to three bits (PACKET_HOST and
    alike are only 6 values defined), but unfortunately the bluetooth
code
    overloads pkt_type :(
    
    The conntrack-event-api (out-of-tree) uses nfcache, but Rusty just
    came up with a way how to do it without any skb fields, so it's safe
    to remove it.
    
    - remove all never-implemented 'nfcache' code
    - don't have ipvs code abuse 'nfcache' field. currently get's their
      own
      compile-conditional skb->ipvs_property field.  IPVS maintainers
can
      decide to move this bit elswhere, but nfcache needs to die.
    - remove skb->nfcache field to save 4 bytes
    - move skb->nfctinfo into three unused bits to save further 4 bytes
    
    Signed-off-by: Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>
    Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>



Thanks
Alex

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: IPMARK nfcache

[Grzegorz Janoszka]

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Alexander Samad wrote:

> Recently went to path IPMARK (Patchlet from patch o matic) to a 2.6.14
> source tree and I have noticed this compilation error
> net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c: In function 'target':
> net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c:36: error: 'struct sk_buff' has no
> member named 'nfcache'
> net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_IPMARK.c:36: error: 'NFC_ALTERED' undeclared
> (first use in this function)
> on investigation the nfcache field from sk_buff has been removed, having
> a look on the net as to why
> I was wondering what mechanism is need to replace the 'ncfcache |
> NFC_ALTERED' statement

My IPMARK was based on original MARK target. You can look what has changed 
in libipt_MARK.c and correct it.

I don't know if I have to submit a new patch or it will be corrected by 
netfilter developers?

-- 
Grzegorz Janoszka

Re: IPMARK nfcache

[Grzegorz Janoszka]

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:

> My IPMARK was based on original MARK target. You can look what has changed in 
> libipt_MARK.c and correct it.

http://patchwork.netfilter.org/netfilter-devel/patch.pl?id=2689

The patch dedicated to net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_MARK.c should go to 
ipt_IPMARK.c

> I don't know if I have to submit a new patch or it will be corrected by 
> netfilter developers?

I suggest you make the changes, can you do it?

-- 
Grzegorz Janoszka

Re: IPMARK nfcache

[Alexander Samad]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 624 bytes --]

On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 07:12:44PM +0200, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
> 
> >My IPMARK was based on original MARK target. You can look what has changed 
> >in libipt_MARK.c and correct it.
> 
> http://patchwork.netfilter.org/netfilter-devel/patch.pl?id=2689
> 
> The patch dedicated to net/ipv4/netfilter/ipt_MARK.c should go to 
> ipt_IPMARK.c
> 
> >I don't know if I have to submit a new patch or it will be corrected by 
> >netfilter developers?
> 
> I suggest you make the changes, can you do it?
Cool, will give it a go!

> 
> -- 
> Grzegorz Janoszka
> 

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]