From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] netfilter: nf_tables: limit maximum table name length to 32 bytes Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 15:12:59 +0100 Message-ID: <20150305141259.GA7374@salvia> References: <1425564336-7265-1-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> <20150305140532.GH29092@acer.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:46431 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751373AbbCEOJU (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2015 09:09:20 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150305140532.GH29092@acer.localdomain> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 02:05:32PM +0000, Patrick McHardy wrote: > On 05.03, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > Set the same as we use for chain names, it should be enough. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso > > --- > > @Patrick: I'm planning to add per-table information after the name field, this > > will make it easier and this stays consistent to what we have in chains and > > sets (and other new object we'll add). I wouldn't expect people using larger > > names than this limit. > > What kind of information are we talking about? The hardware offload stuff, we'll need to keep a reference to the net_device *dev in the table, to call this from the commit path. But I can keep this in that batch if you prefer to have a larger view on this.