lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] iptables 32bit compat layer
From
Date
Mishin Dmitry <dim@openvz.org> writes:

> Hello,
>
> This patch set extends current iptables compatibility layer in order to get
> 32bit iptables to work on 64bit kernel. Current layer is insufficient
> due to alignment checks both in kernel and user space tools.
>
> This patch introduces base compatibility interface for other ip_tables modules

Nice. But some issues with the implementation


+#if defined(CONFIG_X86_64)
+#define is_current_32bits() (current_thread_info()->flags & _TIF_IA32)

This should be is_compat_task(). And we don't do such ifdefs
in generic code. And what you actually need here is a
is_compat_task_with_funny_u64_alignment() (better name sought)

So I would suggest you add macros for that to the ia64 and x86-64
asm/compat.hs and perhaps a ARCH_HAS_FUNNY_U64_ALIGNMENT #define in there.

+ ret = 0;
+ switch (convert) {
+ case COMPAT_TO_USER:
+ pt = (struct ipt_entry_target *)target;

etc. that looks ugly. why can't you just define different functions
for that? We don't really need in kernel ioctl

+#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
+ down(&compat_ipt_mutex);
+#endif

Why does it need an own lock?

Overall the implementation looks very complicated. Are you sure
it wasn't possible to do this simpler?


-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-20 22:26    [W:0.169 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site