Replace open codings of (((u64) <x> * <y>) >> 32) with reciprocal_scale().

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

NOTRACK makes all cpus share a cache line on nf_conntrack_untracked
twice per packet. This is bad for performance.
__read_mostly annotation is also a bad choice.

This patch introduces IPS_UNTRACKED bit so that we can use later a
per_cpu untrack structure more easily.

A new helper, nf_ct_untracked_get() returns a pointer to
nf_conntrack_untracked.

Another one, nf_ct_untracked_status_or() is used by nf_nat_init() to add
IPS_NAT_DONE_MASK bits to untracked status.

nf_ct_is_untracked() prototype is changed to work on a nf_conn pointer.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>

In future, layer-3 matches will be an xt module of their own, and
need to set the fragoff and thoff fields. Adding more pointers would
needlessy increase memory requirements (esp. so for 64-bit, where
pointers are wider).

Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>

Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>

When extended status codes are available, such as ENOMEM on failed
allocations, or subsequent functions (e.g. nf_ct_get_l3proto), passing
them up to userspace seems like a good idea compared to just always
EINVAL.

Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>

The following semantic patch does part of the transformation:
// <smpl>
@ rule1 @
struct xt_match ops;
identifier check;
@@
 ops.checkentry = check;

@@
identifier rule1.check;
@@
 check(...) { <...
-return true;
+return 0;
 ...> }

@@
identifier rule1.check;
@@
 check(...) { <...
-return false;
+return -EINVAL;
 ...> }
// </smpl>

Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>

Restore function signatures from bool to int so that we can report
memory allocation failures or similar using -ENOMEM rather than
always having to pass -EINVAL back.

This semantic patch may not be too precise (checking for functions
that use xt_mtchk_param rather than functions referenced by
xt_match.checkentry), but reviewed, it produced the intended result.

// <smpl>
@@
type bool;
identifier check, par;
@@
-bool check
+int check
 (struct xt_mtchk_param *par) { ... }
// </smpl>

Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>

Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>

net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:46:9: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:46:9:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] ipaddr
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:46:9:    got restricted unsigned int
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:68:10: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:68:10:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] <noident>
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:68:10:    got restricted unsigned int
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:69:10: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:69:10:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] <noident>
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:69:10:    got restricted unsigned int
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:70:10: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:70:10:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] <noident>
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:70:10:    got restricted unsigned int
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:71:10: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:71:10:    expected unsigned int [unsigned] <noident>
net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c:71:10:    got restricted unsigned int

net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c:20:55: warning: incorrect type in return expression (different base types)
net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c:20:55:    expected unsigned int
net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c:20:55:    got restricted unsigned int const [usertype] ip
net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c:20:55: warning: incorrect type in return expression (different base types)
net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c:20:55:    expected unsigned int
net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c:20:55:    got restricted unsigned int const [usertype] ip

Signed-off-by: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>

This patch fixes a problem when you use 32 nodes in the cluster
match:

% iptables -I PREROUTING -t mangle -i eth0 -m cluster \
  --cluster-total-nodes  32  --cluster-local-node  32 \
  --cluster-hash-seed 0xdeadbeef -j MARK --set-mark 0xffff
iptables: Invalid argument. Run `dmesg' for more information.
% dmesg | tail -1
xt_cluster: this node mask cannot be higher than the total number of nodes

The problem is related to this checking:

if (info->node_mask >= (1 << info->total_nodes)) {
	printk(KERN_ERR "xt_cluster: this node mask cannot be "
			"higher than the total number of nodes\n");
	return false;
}

(1 << 32) is 1. Thus, the checking fails.

BTW, I said this before but I insist: I have only tested the cluster
match with 2 nodes getting ~45% extra performance in an active-active setup.
The maximum limit of 32 nodes is still completely arbitrary. I'd really
appreciate if people that have more nodes in their setups let me know.

Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Signed-off-by: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>