From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: MARK: targinfosize 8 != 4 Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 13:01:42 +0100 Message-ID: <439EB826.3070002@trash.net> References: <00fe01c5ffb5$f0a7cf20$455f030a@askeyrd3> <20051213091820.GA1021@DervishD> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl, Netfilter Development Mailinglist Return-path: To: DervishD In-Reply-To: <20051213091820.GA1021@DervishD> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lartc-bounces@mailman.ds9a.nl Errors-To: lartc-bounces@mailman.ds9a.nl List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org DervishD wrote: > Hi Salim :) > > * Salim dixit: > >> I got this problem while trying to shape traffic with iptables MARK and >>HTB. >> >>MARK: targinfosize 8 != 4 >> >>--set-mark gives "invalid argument" error message. >> >>Kernel version is 2.4.29 (some patches from patch o matic applied) >>Iptables version 1.3.4 >> >>Intel x86 architecture. >> >>I saw this problem discussed in a few places, but the discussions didn't >>come to a conclusion or solution. > > > You've hit a bug in iptables :( I've notified in the bugzilla but > I have had no answers. You're building iptables with no shared > libraries (NO_SHARED_LIBS=1). This means that the code in iptables, > when loading the "modules" for the matches and targets is taking a > slightly different code path. The problem is that the MARK target > has two versions, 0 and 1, and kernel 2.4.x (at least until 31) > supports only version 0. If you don't use share libraries in > iptables, both versions are loaded and v1 is used instead of v2. > Unfortunately, v1 has a bigger data structure than v0 and your kernel > complaints. That can't be the reason, all revisions of a single match/target are in the same object file and the supported revision is (supposed to be) probed. Salim, can you send a strace of the failing iptables command? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 12:01:42 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] MARK: targinfosize 8 != 4 Message-Id: <439EB826.3070002@trash.net> List-Id: References: <00fe01c5ffb5$f0a7cf20$455f030a@askeyrd3> <20051213091820.GA1021@DervishD> In-Reply-To: <20051213091820.GA1021@DervishD> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: DervishD Cc: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl, Netfilter Development Mailinglist DervishD wrote: > Hi Salim :) > > * Salim dixit: > >> I got this problem while trying to shape traffic with iptables MARK and >>HTB. >> >>MARK: targinfosize 8 != 4 >> >>--set-mark gives "invalid argument" error message. >> >>Kernel version is 2.4.29 (some patches from patch o matic applied) >>Iptables version 1.3.4 >> >>Intel x86 architecture. >> >>I saw this problem discussed in a few places, but the discussions didn't >>come to a conclusion or solution. > > > You've hit a bug in iptables :( I've notified in the bugzilla but > I have had no answers. You're building iptables with no shared > libraries (NO_SHARED_LIBS=1). This means that the code in iptables, > when loading the "modules" for the matches and targets is taking a > slightly different code path. The problem is that the MARK target > has two versions, 0 and 1, and kernel 2.4.x (at least until 31) > supports only version 0. If you don't use share libraries in > iptables, both versions are loaded and v1 is used instead of v2. > Unfortunately, v1 has a bigger data structure than v0 and your kernel > complaints. That can't be the reason, all revisions of a single match/target are in the same object file and the supported revision is (supposed to be) probed. Salim, can you send a strace of the failing iptables command? _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc