* ip_conntrack_max registered twice
@ 2004-12-15 20:53 Maciej Soltysiak
2004-12-15 20:59 ` Pablo Neira
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Maciej Soltysiak @ 2004-12-15 20:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter-devel
Hi,
I noticed that I have:
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_max
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_conntrack_max
A quick look at net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_standalone.c shows
that we register the same variable (ip_conntrack_max) twice:
In:
ip_ct_sysctl_table[]:
{
.ctl_name = NET_IPV4_NF_CONNTRACK_MAX,
.procname = "ip_conntrack_max",
.data = &ip_conntrack_max,
.maxlen = sizeof(int),
.mode = 0644,
.proc_handler = &proc_dointvec,
},
And in ip_ct_netfilter_table[]:
{
.ctl_name = NET_IP_CONNTRACK_MAX,
.procname = "ip_conntrack_max",
.data = &ip_conntrack_max,
.maxlen = sizeof(int),
.mode = 0644,
.proc_handler = &proc_dointvec
},
Is this for some backward compatibility or is it a needless duplication ?
Regards,
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: ip_conntrack_max registered twice
2004-12-15 20:53 ip_conntrack_max registered twice Maciej Soltysiak
@ 2004-12-15 20:59 ` Pablo Neira
2004-12-16 9:24 ` Maciej Soltysiak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Pablo Neira @ 2004-12-15 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maciej Soltysiak; +Cc: netfilter-devel
Maciej Soltysiak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that I have:
> /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_max
> /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_conntrack_max
>
> A quick look at net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_standalone.c shows
> that we register the same variable (ip_conntrack_max) twice:
>
> In:
> ip_ct_sysctl_table[]:
> {
> .ctl_name = NET_IPV4_NF_CONNTRACK_MAX,
> .procname = "ip_conntrack_max",
> .data = &ip_conntrack_max,
> .maxlen = sizeof(int),
> .mode = 0644,
> .proc_handler = &proc_dointvec,
> },
>
> And in ip_ct_netfilter_table[]:
> {
> .ctl_name = NET_IP_CONNTRACK_MAX,
> .procname = "ip_conntrack_max",
> .data = &ip_conntrack_max,
> .maxlen = sizeof(int),
> .mode = 0644,
> .proc_handler = &proc_dointvec
> },
>
> Is this for some backward compatibility or is it a needless duplication ?
I asked the same some time ago, and Jozsef told me that it's a backward
compatibility issue.
--
Pablo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: ip_conntrack_max registered twice
2004-12-15 20:59 ` Pablo Neira
@ 2004-12-16 9:24 ` Maciej Soltysiak
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Maciej Soltysiak @ 2004-12-16 9:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter-devel
> I asked the same some time ago, and Jozsef told me that it's a backward
> compatibility issue.
Ah, okay, thanks.
--
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-12-16 9:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-12-15 20:53 ip_conntrack_max registered twice Maciej Soltysiak
2004-12-15 20:59 ` Pablo Neira
2004-12-16 9:24 ` Maciej Soltysiak
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.