From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-188.mta1.migadu.com (out-188.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.188]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B4BA28C2B1 for ; Thu, 22 May 2025 13:59:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.188 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747922355; cv=none; b=LFOO0zlsQws5Zp3nonFHsgygnSMN6EMxyFRi1XMx5ow4Q/l+sydBiyBs43AYBptRb2VjhgsRvZqkFMxOMjID+Uz5W+l0q/92g7bei0bg9RKNrBIimTxFvbjFL03/SpeB0QfvnlHOHCd/RqELW6ZPcbd1bYz5O6U8Qz+WvyUf72k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747922355; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VgVZFlJbbO8gVWDD6POpyMTYahmpyFKPPKnI3MI5cv0=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=dXyOdUxWfn0O+PQjrQWKaxrLPwRVtJG7hq9eSm0P6D9Lvs6Ij0dcnP9WNMq2DietmwlARoFWEENJhbXwncXAMQ0oWNoAY9RZtafD0clWm3x6glzpWyeL0U5XQCKhfVgrwkOMBXPMK4Lh1FFnlCsdu1/hgzNeOuJB2b8CYXNG+9k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=aluGZemL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.188 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="aluGZemL" Message-ID: <85c18336-f029-457c-ad75-ab15e05050ee@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1747922340; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=JfrNA2h8hoGkFc6ifKeWxZfX62Ca0zc75XtAmNAQVYc=; b=aluGZemLvtjhu5NzJhDxB1gLzpUuYUkED7TS83WodjXzigil4zgly0i3wZAE0Vyo3857Bb 1HfsO0l3tyFU7EIcFjVSwP7kcKjnyZlrEu2yCzTmc9fz7BkShJlmvxzMN3hqzyv1SsnlsD FodZEs9hKRLdC6XPoc+Y3sZgosxGaCM= Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 21:58:41 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/1] netfilter: load nf_log_syslog on enabling nf_conntrack_log_invalid Content-Language: en-US To: Florian Westphal Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso , Lance Yang , kadlec@netfilter.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Zi Li References: <20250514053751.2271-1-lance.yang@linux.dev> <6f35a7af-bae7-472d-8db6-7d33fb3e5a96@linux.dev> <1c21a452-e1f4-42e0-93c0-0c49e4612dcd@linux.dev> <0e89bc09-c0ee-49d0-bbde-430cca361fd6@linux.dev> X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Lance Yang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 2025/5/22 21:19, Florian Westphal wrote: > Lance Yang wrote: >> Does this helper look correct? > > Yes, but ... >> /** >> * nf_log_is_registered - Check if NF_LOG is registered for a protocol >> * family >> * >> * @pf: protocol family (e.g., NFPROTO_IPV4) >> * >> * Returns true if NF_LOG is registered, false otherwise. >> */ >> bool nf_log_is_registered(int pf) >> { >> struct nf_logger *logger; >> >> logger = nf_logger_find_get(pf, NF_LOG_TYPE_LOG); >> if (logger) { >> nf_logger_put(pf, NF_LOG_TYPE_LOG); >> return true; >> } >> >> logger = nf_logger_find_get(pf, NF_LOG_TYPE_ULOG); >> if (logger) { >> nf_logger_put(pf, NF_LOG_TYPE_ULOG); >> return true; >> } >> >> return false; >> } > > Why not simply do: > > bool nf_log_is_registered(int pf) > { > int i; > > for (i = 0; i < NF_LOG_TYPE_MAX; i++) { > if (rcu_access_pointer(loggers[pf][i])) > return true; > } > > return false; > } Yeah, it's simpler and better. Thanks!