On 8/21/19 12:09 PM, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Fernando Fernandez Mancera <ffmanc...@riseup.net> wrote:
>> This patch adds the infrastructure needed for the stateful object update
>> support.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fernando Fernandez Mancera <ffmanc...@riseup.net>
>> ---
>> include/net/netfilter/nf_tables.h | 6 +++
>> net/netfilter/nf_tables_api.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/nf_tables.h
>> b/include/net/netfilter/nf_tables.h
>> index dc301e3d6739..dc4e32040ea9 100644
>> --- a/include/net/netfilter/nf_tables.h
>> +++ b/include/net/netfilter/nf_tables.h
>> @@ -1123,6 +1123,9 @@ struct nft_object_ops {
>> int (*dump)(struct sk_buff *skb,
>> struct nft_object *obj,
>> bool reset);
>> + int (*update)(const struct nft_ctx *ctx,
>> + const struct nlattr *const
>> tb[],
>> + struct nft_object *obj);
>
> maybe adda 'bool commit' argument here.
>
How is that argument going to be used? If 'commit' is false we should
just check that values are fine but not update them?
>> + err = obj->ops->update(ctx, (const struct nlattr * const *)tb, obj);
>
> Then, set it to 'false' here.
> You would have to keep 'tb' allocated and place it on the 'trans'
> object.
>
Yes, I agree on updating the object in the commit phase. But I am not
sure about how I should place it on 'trans'. Any hints? Thanks :-)
I am also writing some userspace shell tests.
>> + nft_trans_obj_update(trans) = true;
>
> nft_trans_obj_update_tb(trans) = tb;
>
>> - nft_clear(net, nft_trans_obj(trans));
>> - nf_tables_obj_notify(&trans->ctx, nft_trans_obj(trans),
>> - NFT_MSG_NEWOBJ);
>> - nft_trans_destroy(trans);
>> + if (nft_trans_obj_update(trans)) {
>
> nft_trans_obj(trans)->ops->update(&trans->ctx,
> nft_trans_obj_update_tb(trans),
> nft_trans_obj(trans),
> true);
>
> kfree(nft_trans_obj_update_tb(trans));
>
>
> Because otherwise we will update objects while we're not yet sure that
> we can process/handle the entire batch.
>
> I think we should, if possible, only update once we've made it to
> the commit phase.
>
