From: Eric Dumazet <hidden> Date: 2011-01-20 17:54:10
After commit ae90bdeaeac6b (netfilter: fix compilation when conntrack is
disabled but tproxy is enabled) we have following warnings :
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:520:16: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_gather' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:591:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_output' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:612:5: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:640:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_cleanup' was not declared. Should it be static?
Fix this including net/netfilter/ipv6/nf_defrag_ipv6.h
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <redacted>
CC: KOVACS Krisztian <redacted>
---
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
From: Patrick McHardy <hidden> Date: 2011-01-20 19:18:27
Am 20.01.2011 18:53, schrieb Eric Dumazet:
After commit ae90bdeaeac6b (netfilter: fix compilation when conntrack is
disabled but tproxy is enabled) we have following warnings :
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:520:16: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_gather' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:591:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_output' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:612:5: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:640:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_cleanup' was not declared. Should it be static?
Fix this including net/netfilter/ipv6/nf_defrag_ipv6.h
I currently don't have access to all my trees, does this patch
apply to 2.6.38 or just the current -rc?
From: Eric Dumazet <hidden> Date: 2011-01-20 19:57:23
Le jeudi 20 janvier 2011 à 20:18 +0100, Patrick McHardy a écrit :
Am 20.01.2011 18:53, schrieb Eric Dumazet:
quoted
After commit ae90bdeaeac6b (netfilter: fix compilation when conntrack is
disabled but tproxy is enabled) we have following warnings :
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:520:16: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_gather' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:591:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_output' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:612:5: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:640:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_cleanup' was not declared. Should it be static?
Fix this including net/netfilter/ipv6/nf_defrag_ipv6.h
I currently don't have access to all my trees, does this patch
apply to 2.6.38 or just the current -rc?
I dont really understand the question.
Or do you mean 2.6.37 versus 2.6.38-rc1 ?
It's a minor correction anyway, not a stable candidate. It would be good
to push it for current (2.6.38)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Patrick McHardy <hidden> Date: 2011-01-20 20:01:42
Am 20.01.2011 20:57, schrieb Eric Dumazet:
Le jeudi 20 janvier 2011 à 20:18 +0100, Patrick McHardy a écrit :
quoted
Am 20.01.2011 18:53, schrieb Eric Dumazet:
quoted
After commit ae90bdeaeac6b (netfilter: fix compilation when conntrack is
disabled but tproxy is enabled) we have following warnings :
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:520:16: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_gather' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:591:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_output' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:612:5: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_reasm.c:640:6: warning: symbol
'nf_ct_frag6_cleanup' was not declared. Should it be static?
Fix this including net/netfilter/ipv6/nf_defrag_ipv6.h
I currently don't have access to all my trees, does this patch
apply to 2.6.38 or just the current -rc?
I dont really understand the question.
Or do you mean 2.6.37 versus 2.6.38-rc1 ?
Right, that was a typo.
It's a minor correction anyway, not a stable candidate. It would be good
to push it for current (2.6.38)
Applied, thanks.
I'll push this together with a bunch of other fixes to Dave later tonight.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html