From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pablo Neira <pablo@eurodev.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Die to NOTRACK/TRACE, long live MARK!
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 14:38:15 +0200
Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org
Message-ID: <40B33E37.4070807@eurodev.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0405211416341.8045-100000@blackhole.kfki.hu> <40AF6A60.70406@trash.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
 Netfilter Development Mailinglist <netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
In-Reply-To: <40AF6A60.70406@trash.net>
Errors-To: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org
List-Help: <mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter-devel>,
	<mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter-devel>,
	<mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter-devel/>
List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org

Hi Patrick,

Patrick McHardy wrote:

>> Do we really need an unsigned long to store the status? :-)
>
>
> I always thought we would, because set_bit and test_bit take unsigned
> long *, but I'm not sure anymore if that really means we can't use
> something smaller.


if we use atomic operations *_bit for status field in ip_conntrack, we 
only use 24 bits of that unsigned long, this issue lets us keep 
compatibility with some special platforms which only support atomic 
operations of that size.

I read that in  Robert Love's linux kernel development book I think. If 
missing anything, please let me know.

regards,
Pablo