netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2.6 5/5]: act_api: mark some functions static/remove unused f

To: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6 5/5]: act_api: mark some functions static/remove unused function
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:24:24 +0100
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1099583639.1081.30.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4189CB70.3060703@xxxxxxxxx> <1099576602.1039.151.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <418A4AA0.8070609@xxxxxxxxx> <1099583639.1081.30.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041008 Debian/1.7.3-5
jamal wrote:

On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 10:28, Patrick McHardy wrote:

Ok, here is the same patch without removing tc_lookup_action_id.
It is instead surrounded by #if 0.



Why is this function bothering you? ;->
Why do you need to put the #if 0?

Because the compiler will warn about an unused static function.

- move the functions from include/net/pkt_act.h to act_generic.c


Some of the larger ones make sense to move. Whats the main reason for
moving them?

I was talking about the larger ones. There are multiple
large inline functions that are used by all(?) actions.

These two make sense. I need help eyeballing the iptables stuff.
I commented out some of the refcount attempts; also i think quiet a
few targets are not friendly in getting accessed by anything other than
iptables; I was going at some point fix them and send you guys patches.
Maybe you can help me in this area as well.

I can't think of a reason why targets would mind beeing used by ipt,
but I'll look out for problems.

Is there already userspace-code for anything besides gact ?
I would like to test my changes.


Stephen is probably stalled somewhere because he hasnt been sucking in
my updates to iproute2.
I have the latest and greatest on my test machine at home. But here
are tc updates for ipt and mirred that i could find on my laptop.
Thanks.

The ipt patch needs iptables libraries and may not work with latest
iptables (although the one at home will surely work). The problem is some of the iptables functions were updated. It would be nice if i didnt
have to maintain my own variants in user space.
I can't see a way to avoid this currently.

Regards
Patrick


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>