site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com As it turned out, it seems like not possible to have more than one socket filter for same protocol ( like ipv4), second one fails with error at registration time ). Also not sure if one of them can be global and another on demand. I assume it is the same at IP layer, and IF layer! Correct me if I’m wrong . Also I assume the DLIL_ ( data link layer if ) filtering is not encouraged and perhaps on the verge of deprecation. Any input/thought ?
On Sep 19, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Prokash Sinha <prokash@garlic.com> wrote:
Folks,
I’ve a question about the possibility of chaining socket filter. So assume I have two socket filters, and I want to register them ( let’s say globally ).
Now I would assume they would be chained along with the existing ones ( if any ). Now what is the mechanism of hand-off ( For example, a shared ISR vector can have multiple interrupts registered thru a chain. Or like multiple exception handling registered in some stack fashion ).
So there are two returns to indicate, if the kernel continue thru the chain or not.
Is it possible ? If so, then what would be the return indicator/value so that the Network BF module can pass it along the chain. And what would be the value to cut short ( of course without error, something like EJUSTRETURN ??? ).
Thanks, Prokash
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.... This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com