nftables kernel module not loaded
 

Hello

I want to use nftables on my RPi with Slackware 14.2 but the kernel module does not seem to be loaded:

I tried `modprobe nf_tables` but I got:
How can I insert all the needed module into the kernel to be able to use nftables?

-----

I just compared with my desktop computer (also 14.2) and apparently the module is not present is the ARM version.
Is there a reason for that? I there a way to add it?

It's not present in the kernel provided for the RPi, but it is present in the official ARM kernel packages.
You'd need to build your own Kernel with that module enabled, or perhaps whomever made the package for the RPi can update it so that it has the same modules as the official package.

It is the SARPi project's build

I'm using an older "official" kernel from Raspbian and I couldn't find the nf_tables configured&built in it. Was this enabled in more recent kernels?
&
https://wiki.nftables.org/wiki-nftab...s_from_sources

EDIT>
Sorry, misunderstood/misread the statement:
It's not present in the kernel provided for the RPi, but it is present in the official ARM kernel packages.

- wondering now what are the "official ARM kernel packages" ?

The SARPi project is using the sources from the Raspberry Foundation, more exactly what drmozes colloquially called as "provided for the RPi", but you should know that already. The configuration file for that kernel has the nftables modules configuration not set - disabled. Due to the fact that I'm also interested in using the nftables, there was a recent discussion I followed where it was requested that these kernel modules should be configured and built in the kernel provided by Raspberry Foundation in their Raspbian:
https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/issues/2177
However, the discussion is still open and after checking now their latest kernel I couldn't see the nftables modules configured&built.

You could either build these modules on your own, as drmozes suggested, or wait for the Raspberry Foundation to do it. That change will be then reflected also in the SARPi project's build. If you go for your own compilation, then I'd suggest (easier) to do it on Raspbian directly and just pack and move the resulted kernel/modules on Slackware ARM, there are some guides and end results for doing this referenced by sceext2 in this thread:
https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/issues/2177

Good point Stu. Although I'm more in favour of people doing things for themselves.

LOL! I really do not know where you got that information from. :D

The SARPi Project builds it's own kernels.

Common sense told me to consider that you're starting with the official kernel config file from Raspberry Pi:
https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux...2709_defconfig
And if you read (again) carefully through this thread:
https://github.com/raspberrypi/linux/issues/2177
you'll maybe notice the second post from popcornmix, in which he is asking if the OP is requesting that CONFIG_NF_TABLES=m should be added to the kernel config file. Having this change committed, by the next time you clone the Raspberry Foundation kernel repository for building the "SARPi" kernel, you'll inadvertently build the nftables modules too, unless you'll deliberately modify the kernel config and disable them.
Now, not knowing what you're doing is not really amusing, but rather worrying.


@DBLouis

In my previous post I suggested to compile the kernel and add the nftables modules under Raspbian, that's because I considered it easier (there's a lot of automation with apt-get apt-don't-get under Raspbain(Debian fork)) and the process maybe better documented on the Raspberry Foundation doc pages. However, I recalled now that Exaga presented recently a short guide to build the kernel for Raspberry Pi under Slackware ARM and you can follow that together with the completions/discussions in that post:
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...5/#post5803408

If you want to enable the nftables modules, then before issuing:
You'll need to modify the kernel config file /arch/arm/configs/bcm2709_defconfig and ad the following:

The distinction here is that the supplied kernel doesn't match the capabilities of the official kernel, and concomitantly the expectations of what can be achieved with the Slackware OS.
That said, the ARM kernels don't have feature parity with x86 either (and in 14.2 the armv5 kernel config isn't feature parity with the armv7 one (even excluding the exclusive CPU features of each). That said, as far as I know (since most modules that look even remotely useful are included), the capabilities of user land that are reliant upon kernel modules does/should match that of x86.

However, since it's your project - it's your choice. FWIW though, I have started modifying -current's kernel config to match new changes in x86, if it makes sense.

Not knowing what I'm doing? I'll treat that remark with the contempt it deserves.

Considering that I've asked you to stop misrepresenting the SARPi Project and spreading misinformation about it, and yet you still continue to do so, is not really amusing and rather worrying. I do not know what you're trying to achieve by second-guessing and assuming. It's becoming so frequent an occurrence that I'm starting to think you have a personal vendetta against the project and/or those involved with it.

Either you're ignoring me on purpose because you think you know better or you're attempting to discredit the project because you don't use it or want it and, as you've stated previously, that you don't see a need for it. Whatever your reason(s) may be they are not supportive or helpful. Much the opposite, in fact.

I have invited you to apply to join the project but you've declined. Yet you apparently still feel qualified to spread your opinion about certain aspects as though it's fact or that you are some authority on it. You're not qualified to speak on behalf of the SARPi Project and you are certainly no authority on anything to do with it. You don't even use it. How then can you comment on it to any degree?

I work on the project. I've supported it since the beginning. I am qualified and authorised to comment on it in every aspect and at every level. You are not. So, please refrain from dragging our work (and reputation) through the mire. If you think you can do better, by all means, be my guest and show the world what you have to offer.

Sure. It makes good sense. At least until someone runs rpi-update and breaks the previous functionality of their system. That *will* happen. Experience over the past ~6 years dictates it.

It will be no problem and a little time and effort to bring everything in line. I'm in full agreement that it needs to happen in order that, as you inferred, the realisation(s) of what can be expected and achieved with Slackware ARM can be experienced with minimal (or without any) disparity. That in itself will be very cool. :cool:

Actually, just thinking it through, we should have done this a long time ago.

You maybe should have used your contempt in your previous post while meaninglessly LOL-ing and not staying on-topic, helping the OP with his issue.

I never misinterpreted your project, nor have I spread any information about it and your generalization, while a basic logical fallacy, might need some proof to be credible. I was only stating that I'm not using anything from that project because I don't consider anything useful for my work and for what I need, the Slackware ARM official documentation is sufficient. That was my personal opinion and no judging whatsoever.

While trying to stay on-topic, and since I observe that you are definitely ignoring the topic / subject of this thread, on which I'm also interested, are you stating that you are not using the source and the default configuration file provided by the Raspberry Foundation for the kernel that you're building in your SARPi project? Because that's what I understood was suggested in your post #6

I'm asking this because I tried to help the OP on-topic and suggested him to compile the kernel on its own if he likes to have the nftables functionality. And, as I'm also interested in this, I might also do it myself, not waiting for the Raspberry Foundation to modify the kernel configuration file and then maybe use the kernel image from the SARPi project, over which I don't have any information yet.

LOL! I hope you can appreciate the paradoxical symmetry of this statement. :D

When you give a false or misleading account of something, you're misrepresenting it. For example; stating that slackpkg breaks your system and removes package dependencies, or stating that rpi-update is a tool that pertains to the SARPi project, or stating that changes in the work released by the Raspberry Pi Foundation will be then reflected also in the SARPi project's work. This is what can be attributed to misrepresentation. All these examples were posted by you, on this LQ forum.

You asked for proof in order for my generalisations, and basic logical fallacy, to be credible. Well, there you have it.

Not staying on-topic after the issue has been (re)solved is a moot point. Mozes has already given the most concise answer within the 2nd post of this thread. I didn't need (and wasn't intending) to get involved until your uninformed remark about the way the SARPi Project works.

I *will* correct inaccuracies involving the SARPi Project as and when and where I see them. I *will* correct individuals who continue to spread disinformation and question "Why???" they continue to do so. I cannot allow people to mislead others when it relates to something I am responsible for.

I wasn't the only one reporting that, please inform yourself objectively before doing such subjective, maybe emotionally driven, accusations. I was however more concise, as you like to call it, about the packages that were removed and not updated. But you shouldn't worry about these, as drmozes is the Slackware ARM maintainer and not you. You maybe also missed drmozes' recent confirmation on the slackpkg issues:
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...5/#post5814681
Now, this is presented only on your little project page and the context (thread) I was suggesting it was for a user that was trying to update his/her SARPi kernel:
http://sarpi.co.uk/index.php?p=rpiupdate
Let me quote:
Here you are continuously refusing to provide information/clarification about the sources you're using to build the SARPi kernel and the information you're presenting on the SARPi project webpage suggests that you're only using the official sources without any modifications:
http://sarpi.co.uk/index.php?p=sarpi
The method to install Slackware ARM requires a kernel based on either the binaries (bundled in Raspbian) or the source provided by the Raspberry Foundation and your statement "without any modification(s) to the original source" implies that whatever changes the Raspberry Foundation is committing upstream, will be then reflected in your little project kernel once you update your releases.

This post is pretty much off-topic but I took my right to provide proof that your accusations are all wrong. I'd also like to mention that I got trolled twice already by your fellow companion Exaga and I believe that you're wise and mature enough to not go that path. Worth to underline that trolling is a criminal offense in your beautiful country:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling#United_Kingdom

Diverting all the support issues for your project here on the official Slackware ARM forum and then bashing people who tried to help on them is not the decent and appropriate way to go, I guess. I was suggesting in another thread to add some value to your little project and improve the documentation by at least respecting the "necessary and sufficient" criteria. Drmozes also suggested in this very thread (see post #8) to add more value to the kernel provided in your little project and enable some common features (modules), maybe starting with nftables.

I believe these are some good points you should consider and a more appropriate way to make your little project more valuable.

/unsubscribed

You can dress it up however you like and try to justify your reasoning with hand-crafted, cherry-picked, examples which are often misconstrued and taken out of context in an attempt to further strengthen any point(s) or claim(s) you're trying to make. There's no legitimacy in resorting to methods such as this.

The point is; you asked for proof of your misrepresentation(s) and you got it. Unfortunately, this proof not only shows that you misrepresented the SARPi Project, but Slackware ARM as well. Which is exactly the point I was wanting to make; that this wasn't an isolated incident and it is becoming a frequent occurrence from you.

Quoting the SARPi website to me when I am the author of it is quite absurd and does nothing to reinforce your argument(s). If it doesn't say it on the website then please don't make it up as it suits you. Nobody should care about what you think you think. Stick to facts, not assumption. The SARPi website is quite comprehensive and no apologies are made if it doesn't quite match your satisfactory standards. I'm not interested in your (apparent) biased opinion on how the website could be better documented or what a "little" SARPi project it is. All I hear mostly from others is how accurate and helpful the website is when they've used it to install Slackware ARM. Therefore there's no reason to attribute any validity towards your negative criticisms.

Refusing to disclose information or give clarification regarding source data (or anything else regarding the SARPi Project) is my prerogative. My work is my own affair and I'll do with it as I please. If I don't or won't tell you any information you ask for then that's the end of it. There is no recourse. The buck stops with me.

Whichever source(s) are selected and used to build installers and packages is irrelevant. If it works, GREAT! If it doesn't work, BIG PROBLEM! I don't spend hours and hours of my free time making sure Slackware ARM installs perfectly on the Raspberry Pi to then have to explain myself to people who seem quite content to make it up as they go along.

Didn't I reply to Mozes' post about feature parity with x86? Didn't you read it? Should I be a bigot and quote that post to you because I think it makes me look more intelligent and justified? No, of course not. That would be childish and small-minded of me if I did. Just as it would be for anyone else who did the same.

Did I miss Mozes' post about slackpkg in -current? No, of course not.

Exaga trolled you twice?!?! Is that a complaint that you weren't trolled enough, or that you were trolled at all?

Can't help you with United Kingdom criminal law. Regarding trolling, the only thing I'm guilty of is breaking alienBOB's advice when he frequently says on these LQ forums, "Do not feed the trolls!" because if that was a crime I'd be doing a lengthy prison term right now. LOL! :D

This is another good example of you taking something out of context and misconstruing it on purpose to suit your argument. I don't 'bash' people who try to help. I do correct people who mislead others when it concerns the SARPi project. Which is the point here!

You question my level of decency and say I'm being inappropriate when YOU are the one spreading misinformation about my project. If there's any moral legitimacy in your statement then it must have left the text editor before you had chance to hit the Enter key. I guess you'd better guess again on that one. HAHAHA! LOL! :D :D :D

The decision to invite SARPi users to offer and seek advice on the LQ forums was made because we wanted to consolidate support for Slackware ARM here. This decision wasn't made by the SARPi team alone. Others were involved.

You've probably never heard of the FatDog forum, where the SARPi Project used to be hosted. Go read it. It's full of information of the kind you're asking about. This forum has been pretty much abandoned by the SARPi team in favour of channelling all our support towards these LQ forums.

After dealing with you, and your very unhelpful and unaccommodating attitude, I wish we hadn't made that decision.