Re: [PATCH 3/8] [NETFILTER]: rename NF_ARP to NFPROTO_ARP and assign a non-clashing value

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Wednesday 2008-04-09 18:50, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Right. There is currently to my knowledge only a single
>> place where this happens, which is net/xfrm/xfrm_output.c.
>> All others explicitly pass AF_INET etc, and then would
>> simply pass NFPROTO_INET.
>>
>> But you have a point, that doesn't sound ideal.
>>
>> Unfortunately, as I said, we need to export these values
>> to userspace, so we can't have them depend on AF_MAX.
>> Another constraint is that they must not exceed 255
>> or they won't fit in nfgenmsg->nfgen_family.
>>
>> Mhh tricky. I still would prefer to avoid AF_ARP ...
>>
> I would have been going for NFPROTO_ now, with a translation
> table for use for things like the xfrm code.

We need to keep the INET/INET6 values identical anyway,
so there no need for translation here.

> Should I change all AF_INET6 to NFPROTO_ in the same run
> (i.e. mostly xt_[A-Za-z]*.c), or leave it as is?

If we introduce those values, they should be used everywhere.