[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180710080538.d7xqpjdvpksfrx6o@sch.bme.hu>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 10:05:38 +0200
From: Máté Eckl <ecklm94@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Flavio Leitner <fbl@...hat.com>,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: NFT_SOCKET don't use NF_SOCKET_IPV6 without
NF_TABLES_IPV6
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:02:27AM +0200, Máté Eckl wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 11:35:09PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > It is now possible to build the nft_socket module as built-in when
> > NF_TABLES_IPV6 is disabled, and have NF_SOCKET_IPV6=m set manually.
> >
> > In this case, the NF_SOCKET_IPV6 functionality will be useless according
> > to the explanation in commit 35bf1ccecaaa ("netfilter: Kconfig: Change
> > IPv6 select dependencies"), but on top of that it also causes a link
> > error:
> >
> > net/netfilter/nft_socket.o: In function `nft_socket_eval':
> > nft_socket.c:(.text+0x162): undefined reference to `nf_sk_lookup_slow_v6'
> >
> > This changes the compile-time check so we don't attempt to use
> > the NF_SOCKET_IPV6 code when it cannot be used, and make it all
> > compile again. That may lead to unexpected behavior when a user
> > enables NF_SOCKET_IPV6 but cannot use it, but seems to be the
> > logical conclusion of the 35bf1ccecaaa change.
> >
> > Fixes: 35bf1ccecaaa ("netfilter: Kconfig: Change IPv6 select dependencies")
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>
> I think this should be fixed in the Kconfig rather than inside the module(s).
>
> I did some investigation and it turns out that you missed a circumstance. This
> link error occures only if NFT_SOCKET=y && NF_SOCKET_IPV6=m && NF_TABLES_IPV6=y
> (cannot be m here if NFT_SOCKET is y). And probably the same with
> iptables-related modules. Probably this possibility should be eliminated.
NF_TPROXY_IPV6 might be in the same situation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists