From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Bursztyka Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] netfilter: nf_tables: rework atomic transaction updates Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:03:39 +0300 Message-ID: <515A9EEB.2090701@linux.intel.com> References: <1364502145-3701-1-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> <1364502145-3701-2-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, kaber@trash.net To: pablo@netfilter.org Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:55396 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753999Ab3DBJEC (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Apr 2013 05:04:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1364502145-3701-2-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Pablo, > * A new begin operation to explicitly enter the transaction mode, > and remove the COMMIT flag per rule, as suggested by Tomasz. Could you split your patch to 2? - one which removes this flag and add *BEGIN* message stuff - and a the later one which propose the rest > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/nf_tables.h > @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ enum nf_tables_msg_types { > NFT_MSG_NEWSETELEM, > NFT_MSG_GETSETELEM, > NFT_MSG_DELSETELEM, > + NFT_MSG_BEGIN, > NFT_MSG_COMMIT, > NFT_MSG_ABORT, > NFT_MSG_MAX, Still, I think it's awkward to propose a fully-explicit message name for all but for the transaction ones. NFT_MSG_BEGINTRANSACT or something like that, would be better. Br, Tomasz