From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart De Schuymer Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/10] netfilter: ebtables: CONFIG_COMPAT support Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 14:20:48 +0100 Message-ID: <4B76A730.4000203@pandora.be> References: <1265897559-10610-1-git-send-email-fw@strlen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Florian Westphal Return-path: Received: from brigitte.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.137.66]:56651 "EHLO brigitte.telenet-ops.be" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751602Ab0BMNU5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:20:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1265897559-10610-1-git-send-email-fw@strlen.de> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Florian Westphal schreef: > Hello everyone, > > this is version 2 of the ebtables CONFIG_COMPAT patch set. > > First patches are minor bug fixes/preparation patches. Patch 7 is the > main CONFIG_COMPAT hunk, 8 handles those ebtables binaries specifically > built for 64 bit kernel (i.e. pad in userspace). > > Last two patches add CONFIG_COMPAT support to the targets/matches that > need special handling (maybe I missed some, though). > > Tested on x86_64 with x86 userland by comparing output of 32 and 64 bit ebtables binaries. One little cleanup that could be done is remove the last use of MEMPRINT and the corresponding macro in patch 5/10. For patch 8/10, I'd just remove the BUGPRINT line instead of adding the compat argument to copy_counters_to_user(). But apart from that, the patches look ok to me (patch 10 was missing I think). cheers, Bart -- Bart De Schuymer www.artinalgorithms.be