On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:28:31PM +0300, Paul Blakey wrote:
...
> +static int tcf_ct_fill_params_nat(struct tcf_ct_params *p,
> + struct tc_ct *parm,
> + struct nlattr **tb,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + struct nf_nat_range2 *range;
> +
> + if (!(p->ct_action & TCA_CT_ACT_NAT))
> + return 0;
> +
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_NAT)) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Netfilter nat isn't enabled in
> kernel");
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + }
> +
> + if (!(p->ct_action & (TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_SRC | TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_DST)))
> + return 0;
> +
> + if ((p->ct_action & TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_SRC) &&
> + (p->ct_action & TCA_CT_ACT_NAT_DST)) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "dnat and snat can't be enabled at
> the same time");
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + }
> +
> + range = &p->range;
> + if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MIN]) {
> + range->min_addr.ip =
> + nla_get_in_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MIN]);
> + range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> + p->ipv4_range = true;
> + }
> + if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MAX]) {
> + range->max_addr.ip =
> + nla_get_in_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV4_MAX]);
> + range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> + p->ipv4_range = true;
> + } else if (range->min_addr.ip) {
> + range->max_addr.ip = range->min_addr.ip;
> + }
> +
> + if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MIN]) {
> + range->min_addr.in6 =
> + nla_get_in6_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MIN]);
> + range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> + p->ipv4_range = false;
> + }
> + if (tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MAX]) {
> + range->max_addr.in6 =
> + nla_get_in6_addr(tb[TCA_CT_NAT_IPV6_MAX]);
> + range->flags |= NF_NAT_RANGE_MAP_IPS;
> + p->ipv4_range = false;
> + } else if (memchr_inv(&range->min_addr.in6, 0,
> + sizeof(range->min_addr.in6))) {
> + range->max_addr.in6 = range->min_addr.in6;
This will overwrite ipv4_max if it was used, as min/max_addr are
unions.
What about having the _MAX handling (for both ipv4/6) inside the
if (.._MIN) { } block ?
> + }
> +
