lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 20:10:35 +0800 From: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com> To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, Netfilter Developers <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC nf-next-2.6] conntrack: per cpu nf_conntrack_untracked On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> wrote: > Eric Dumazet wrote: >> Obviously, an IPS_UNTRACKED bit would be much easier to implement. >> Would it be acceptable ? > > That also would be fine. However the main idea behind using a nfctinfo > bit was that we wouldn't need the untracked conntrack anymore at all. > But I guess a per-cpu untrack conntrack would already be an improvement > over the current situation. I think Eric didn't mean ip_conntrack_info but ip_conntrack_status bit. Since we have had a IPS_TEMPLATE bit, I think another IPS_UNTRACKED bit is also acceptable. -- Regards, Changli Gao(xiaosuo@...il.com) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists