From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Subject: Re: [patch v2.6 4/4] libxt_ipvs: user-space lib for netfilter
 matcher xt_ipvs
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:38:17 +0900
Message-ID: <20100722013817.GB15008@verge.net.au>
References: <20100711090342.035149543@vergenet.net>
 <20100711090500.421568837@vergenet.net>
 <20100721012146.GC22966@verge.net.au>
 <alpine.LSU.2.01.1007210834570.10568@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
 <20100721132159.GN6418@verge.net.au>
 <alpine.LSU.2.01.1007211526490.25445@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
 <20100721134102.GA21188@verge.net.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <lvs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100721134102.GA21188@verge.net.au>
Sender: lvs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netfilter.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Malcolm Turnbull <malcolm@loadbalancer.org>, Wensong Zhang <wensong@linux-vs.org>, Julius Volz <julius.volz@gmail.com>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Hannes Eder <heder@google.com>

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:41:03PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 03:28:16PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > 
> > On Wednesday 2010-07-21 15:21, Simon Horman wrote:
> > >> On Wednesday 2010-07-21 03:21, Simon Horman wrote:
> > >> >> +
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_IPVS_PROPERTY	(1 << 0) /* all other options imply this one */
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_PROTO		(1 << 1)
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_VADDR		(1 << 2)
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_VPORT		(1 << 3)
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_DIR		(1 << 4)
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_METHOD		(1 << 5)
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_VPORTCTL	(1 << 6)
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_MASK		((1 << 7) - 1)
> > >> >> +#define XT_IPVS_ONCE_MASK	(XT_IPVS_MASK & ~XT_IPVS_IPVS_PROPERTY)
> > >> 
> > >> Can't these just be an enum?
> > >
> > >More than one option can be used at once - they form a mini bitmap -
> > >so no, I don't think we can use an enum.
> > 
> > An enum does not dictate that you cannot combine values of it with itself.
> > 
> > 	enum { A = 1 << 0, B = 1 << 0, };
> > 	unsigned int flags = A | B;
> > 
> > is perfectly fine, which is what other modules do.
> 
> Understood. I'll make it so.

Hi Jan,

I must confess that I'm not familiar with using enum in this way.
Can I confirm that you are suggesting the following?

enum {
	XT_IPVS_IPVS_PROPERTY =	1 << 0, /* all other options imply this one */
	XT_IPVS_PROTO =		1 << 1,
	XT_IPVS_VADDR =		1 << 2,
	XT_IPVS_VPORT =		1 << 3,
	XT_IPVS_DIR =		1 << 4,
	XT_IPVS_METHOD =	1 << 5,
	XT_IPVS_VPORTCTL =	1 << 6,
	XT_IPVS_MASK =		(1 << 7) - 1,
	XT_IPVS_ONCE_MASK =	(XT_IPVS_MASK & ~XT_IPVS_IPVS_PROPERTY)
};