Re: [PATCH] uapi/netfilter: Change netfilter hook verdict code definition from macro to enum

[Florian Westphal]

David Wang <00107082@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello,

> At 2023-09-06 00:38:02, "Daniel Xu" <dxu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >Hi David,
> >
> >On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 09:02:02PM +0800, David Wang wrote:
> 
> >>  #include <linux/in6.h>
> >>  
> >>  /* Responses from hook functions. */
> >> -#define NF_DROP 0
> >> -#define NF_ACCEPT 1
> >> -#define NF_STOLEN 2
> >> -#define NF_QUEUE 3
> >> -#define NF_REPEAT 4
> >> -#define NF_STOP 5	/* Deprecated, for userspace nf_queue compatibility. */
> >> -#define NF_MAX_VERDICT NF_STOP
> >> +enum {
> >> +	NF_DROP        = 0,
> >> +	NF_ACCEPT      = 1,
> >> +	NF_STOLEN      = 2,
> >> +	NF_QUEUE       = 3,
> >> +	NF_REPEAT      = 4,
> >> +	NF_STOP        = 5,	/* Deprecated, for userspace nf_queue compatibility. */
> >> +	NF_MAX_VERDICT = NF_STOP,
> >> +};
> >
> >Switching from macro to enum works for almost all use cases, but not
> >all. If someone if #ifdefing the symbols (which is plausible) this
> >change would break them.
> >
> >I think I've seen some other networking code define both enums and
> >macros. But it was a little ugly. Not sure if that is acceptable here or
> >not.
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Daniel
> 
> 
> Thanks for the review~
> I do not have a strong reasoning to deny the possibility of breaking unexpected usage of this macros,
> 
> but I also agree that it is ugly to use both enum and macro at the same time.
> 
> Kind of don't know how to proceed from here now...

I was about to apply this as-is, but Pablo Neira would prefer to
keep the defines as well.

So, as a compromise, I would suggest to just *add*

/* verdicts available to BPF are exported via vmlinux.h */
enum {
	NF_DROP = 0,
	NF_ACCEPT = 1,
};

#define NF_DROP 0
...

This way BTF won't have the other verdicts, but ATM those
cannot be used in BPF programs anyway.

Would you mind making a new version of the patch?
Otherwise I can mangle it locally here as needed.