From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] netfilter: ipv6: add IPSKB_REROUTED exclusion to NF_HOOK/POSTROUTING invocation
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:36:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BC4735A.3050809@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.01.1004131533490.32023@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Tuesday 2010-04-13 15:33, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
>>> index f314ba4..7e10f62 100644
>>> --- a/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
>>> +++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
>>> @@ -172,8 +172,9 @@ int ip6_output(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - return NF_HOOK(NFPROTO_IPV6, NF_INET_POST_ROUTING, skb, NULL, dev,
>>> - ip6_finish_output);
>>> + return NF_HOOK_COND(NFPROTO_IPV6, NF_INET_POST_ROUTING, skb, NULL, dev,
>>> + ip6_finish_output,
>>> + !(IP6CB(skb)->flags & IPSKB_REROUTED));
>> This needs to use an IP6SKB value to avoid clashes. I've fixed it up
>> as follows:
>
> Would merging the IPSKB and IP6SKB flags be worth it?
>
I don't think so, the CB is by definition private to each layer.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-13 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-13 12:37 nf-next: reentrancy, new modules Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 1/8] netfilter: ipv6: move POSTROUTING invocation before fragmentation Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 13:30 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 2/8] netfilter: ipv6: add IPSKB_REROUTED exclusion to NF_HOOK/POSTROUTING invocation Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 13:33 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-13 13:34 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 13:36 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 3/8] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_TEE Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 13:37 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-13 13:45 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-13 16:09 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 16:17 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 16:33 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-13 16:32 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-13 17:28 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 17:31 ` Patrick McHardy
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 4/8] netfilter: xtables2: make ip_tables reentrant Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 5/8] netfilter: xt_TEE: have cloned packet travel through Xtables too Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 6/8] netfilter: xtables: remove old comments about reentrancy Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 7/8] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_SYSRQ Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 12:37 ` [PATCH 8/8] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_condition Jan Engelhardt
2010-04-13 13:26 ` nf-next: reentrancy, new modules Patrick McHardy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4BC4735A.3050809@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.