On 03/09/2016 04:02 PM, Li Zhijian wrote: > > > On 03/08/2016 04:04 PM, Yang Hongyang wrote: >> Hi Chen, >> >> What's the motivation that you want to change this name? The >> function actually is not >> intent to iterate every filter. > > Right. but this function isn't always pass packet to *a* next filter. > Actually, it iterates filters until the packet is stolen(filter > receiving handler return non-zero). > In other words, packet could be handled by several filters at this > function. > > BTW, it's difficult to determine what name is better. > > Thanks > Li Zhijian
Right, so I was considering a better function name (though I'm not a native English speaker). But I agree qemu_netfilter_iterate() is not perfect too, may need more thought.
