From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kristian Evensen Subject: Re: [PATCH libnftables v2] Add support for ct set Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:26:12 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1389170211-7024-1-git-send-email-kristian.evensen@gmail.com> <20140110005015.GA18032@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Netfilter Development Mailing list To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com ([209.85.160.53]:34787 "EHLO mail-pb0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751148AbaAJI0N (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jan 2014 03:26:13 -0500 Received: by mail-pb0-f53.google.com with SMTP id ma3so4152232pbc.12 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 00:26:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20140110005015.GA18032@localhost> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Pablo, On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 1:50 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > Please, rework this. It would be good to rework the meta/set part > available in libnftables next-3.14. If you cannot make it, let me know > and I'll schedule time to fix that. Thanks. Thank you for your feedback, I will try to rework the patch today and if not, then over the weekend. Btw, during development I noticed that the dreg in ct (in libnftables) is store as a uint32, while meta uses a uint8 for dreg/sreg. I use a uint32 for sreg to be consistent with what is already there, but after looking more into the code this seems not be needed as kernel sreg/dreg is only 8 bits wide. Should I change the storage type for sreg/dreg at the same time, or does it qualify as obscure behavior too? -Kristian