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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:23:01 -0500
From:	Jon Masters <>
To:	Eric Dumazet <>
Cc:	Patrick McHardy <>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <>,
	linux-kernel <>,
	netdev <>,
	netfilter-devel <>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <>
Subject: Re: PROBLEM with summary: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: per netns

On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 18:16 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le mardi 02 février 2010 à 18:04 +0100, Patrick McHardy a écrit :
> > Ah nice catch, that seems to be the problem. When the untracked
> > conntrack is already attached to an skb and thus has refcnt > 1
> > and we re-initalize the refcnt, it will get freed.
> > 
> > The question is whether the ct_net pointer of the untracked conntrack
> > is actually required. If so, we need one instance per namespace,
> > otherwise we can just move initialization and cleanup to the init_net
> > init/cleanup functions. Alexey, do you happen to know this?
> > 
> One untracked per netns seems the way to go, and move it outside of
> read_mostly area too, we obviously can modify its refcount frequently...

Sure, that will work. Also, rather than just the NF_CT_ASSERT on the use
count, maybe worth catching the specific case of trying to free the
untracked ct, but that's only if it's not a horrible fast path.

Anyway, thanks. If you want to send me a patch, I'll try it.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists