On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:31:44AM +0100, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Marlier <[email protected]>
> ---
> net/netfilter/core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/core.c b/net/netfilter/core.c
> index fea9ef5..05bd311 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/core.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/core.c
> @@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ int nf_hook_slow(u_int8_t pf, unsigned int hook,
> struct sk_buff *skb,
> /* We may already have this, but read-locks nest anyway */
> rcu_read_lock();
>
> - elem = list_entry_rcu(&nf_hooks[pf][hook], struct nf_hook_ops, list);
> + elem = list_entry_rcu(nf_hooks[pf][hook].next, struct nf_hook_ops, list);
And this departs from the list_entry() API. Is this really a good idea?
Thanx, Paul
> next_hook:
> verdict = nf_iterate(&nf_hooks[pf][hook], skb, hook, indev,
> outdev, &elem, okfn, hook_thresh);
> --
> 2.1.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
