Re: [PATCH,RFC] Route match, kernel

[Phil Oester <kernel@linuxace.com>]

On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 09:22:03AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> 
> >+	case XT_ROUTE_SRC_EXISTS:
> >+		fl.nl_u.ip4_u.daddr = iph->saddr;
> >+		ret = fib_lookup(dev_net(in), &fl, &res);
> >+		if (ret == 0 && res.prefixlen != 0) {
> >+			fib_res_put(&res);
> >+			return true ^ info->invert;
> >+		}
> >+	case XT_ROUTE_SRC_EQ:
> >+		fl.nl_u.ip4_u.daddr = iph->saddr;
> >+		ret = fib_lookup(dev_net(in), &fl, &res);
> >+		if (ret == 0 && res.prefixlen == info->prefixlen) {
> >+			fib_res_put(&res);
> >+			return true;
> >+		}
> >+		break;
> 
> Should not these be true ^ info->invert too?

No - invert is only supported on the *_EXISTS case.  Didn't see any point
in supporting invert on gt/lt, but now that I think of it perhaps supporting
it on _EQ may be useful.  But can you see a point on gt/lt?

> I would probably combine mode and invert, to save a byte.

Possible.

> >+static bool
> >+route_mt6(const struct sk_buff *skb, const struct net_device *in,
> >+           const struct net_device *out, const struct xt_match *match,
> >+           const void *matchinfo, int offset, unsigned int protoff,
> >+           bool *hotdrop)
> >+{
> >+	return 1;
> >+}
> 
> If you do not support IPv6, do not write a function for it ;-)

OK, so I should have #if 0 it...but this is just an RFC and that was
listed in the TODO ;-)

Thanks for the review BTW.

Phil