Conversation
| req2.AddRawData(dataRaw[4:]) | ||
| req2.Execute(unix.NETLINK_NETFILTER, 0) | ||
| matched++ | ||
| break |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this may use one comment to indicate the flow was already deleted so no need to process more filters and we can continue in the next flow
ConntrackDeleteFilters enables users to delete flow entries that match any of the specified filters. This allows users to delete multiple flow entries with a single dump table call. Signed-off-by: Daman Arora <[email protected]>
aroradaman
force-pushed
the
contrack-delete-filters
branch
from
a0579cf to
c96b03b
Compare
|
I was just looking for a function like this; hope it makes it in! |
|
cc. @aboch |
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // ConntrackDeleteFilter deletes entries on the specified table on the base of the filter using the netlink handle passed |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
question for the maintainers, but they may prefer to leave the singular too for backwards compatibility purposes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree, and it is taken care of above:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is indeed a breaking change; the singular one above only took care of the function, but looks like it missed adding a Handle.ConntrackDeleteFilter (singular) method on Handle; see
73.74 # github.com/docker/docker/libnetwork/iptables
73.74 libnetwork/iptables/conntrack.go:78:28: nlh.ConntrackDeleteFilter undefined (type *netlink.Handle has no field or method ConntrackDeleteFilter)
73.74 libnetwork/iptables/conntrack.go:84:28: nlh.ConntrackDeleteFilter undefined (type *netlink.Handle has no field or method ConntrackDeleteFilter)
73.74 libnetwork/iptables/conntrack.go:105:13: nlh.ConntrackDeleteFilter undefined (type *netlink.Handle has no field or method ConntrackDeleteFilter)
| // Flush entries of groupB | ||
| var deleted uint | ||
| if deleted, err = h.ConntrackDeleteFilter(ConntrackTable, unix.AF_INET, filter); err != nil { | ||
| if deleted, err = h.ConntrackDeleteFilters(ConntrackTable, unix.AF_INET, filter); err != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you may better add a new test or expand this to delete multiple flows with two different filters to exercise the new functionality
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm also considering passing the errors back to the caller. Currently, Execute() can return an error, but it is not being captured.
Also returning the error will be difficult in case of multiple filters, we would have to decide if we want to exit immediately in case of error, or try out all the filters and then return the error at the end.
|
LGTM |
5 participants
ConntrackDeleteFilters enables users to delete flow entries that match any of the specified filters. This allows users to delete multiple flow entries with a single dump table call.