Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] route: allow to route in a peer netns via lwt framework

From: Nicolas Dichtel <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:25:51 +0200

Le 23/07/2015 17:01, roopa a écrit :
> On 7/23/15, 7:22 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
[snip]
>> +static inline u32 *lwt_netns_info(struct lwtunnel_state *lwtstate)
>> +{
>> +    return (u32 *)lwtstate->data;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline int skb_lwt_netns_info(struct sk_buff *skb)
>> +{
>> +    if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP)) {
>> +        struct rtable *rt = (struct rtable *)skb_dst(skb);
>> +
>> +        if (rt && rt->rt_lwtstate)
>> +            return *lwt_netns_info(rt->rt_lwtstate);
>> +    } else if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IPV6)) {
>> +        struct rt6_info *rt6 = (struct rt6_info *)skb_dst(skb);
>> +
>> +        if (rt6 && rt6->rt6i_lwtstate)
>> +            return *lwt_netns_info(rt6->rt6i_lwtstate);
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    return NETNSA_NSID_NOT_ASSIGNED;
>> +}
>>   #endif /* __NET_LWTUNNEL_H */
> since these apis' don't have to be netns specific,
> Can they just be named lwtunnel_get_state_data and skb_lwtunnel_state ?
They are specific to netns because lwtstate->data is interpreted as an u32 *.
But I agree that a test is missing against lwtstate->type to ensure that data
will be a nsid.

>
> and seems like they should be declared for both CONFIG_LWTUNNEL 'y' and 'n'.
It is outside the "#ifdef CONFIG_LWTUNNEL". I can successfully compile with and
without CONFIG_LWTUNNEL.

Thank you,
Nicolas