Florian Westphal <f...@strlen.de> writes:

> Eric W. Biederman <ebied...@xmission.com> wrote:
>> Florian could you test and verify this patch fixes your issues?
>
> Yes, this seems to work.
>
> Pablo, I'm fine with this patch going into -nf/stable but I do not think
> making the pointers per netns is a desireable option in the long term.
>
>> Unlike the other possibilities that have been discussed this also
>> addresses the nf_queue path as well as the nf_queue_hook_drop path.
>
> The nf_queue path should have been fine, no?
>
> Or putting it differently: can we start processing skbs before a netns
> is fully initialized?

The practical case that worries me is what happens when someone does
"rmmod nfnetlink_queue" while the system is running.  It appears to me
that today we could free the per netns data during the rcu grace period
and cause a similar issue in nfnl_queue_pernet.

That looks like it could affect both the nf_queue path and the
nf_queue_nf_hook_drop path.

Eric



Reply via email to