On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 16:14:45 +0200
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 15:52 +0200, Ulrich Weber wrote:
> > hlist walk in find_appropriate_src() is not protected anymore by rcu_read_lock(),
> > so rcu_read_unlock() is unnecessary if in_range() matches.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ulrich Weber <ulrich.weber@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/netfilter/nf_nat_core.c | 4 +---
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_nat_core.c b/net/netfilter/nf_nat_core.c
> > index 1816ad3..125d832 100644
> > --- a/net/netfilter/nf_nat_core.c
> > +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_nat_core.c
> > @@ -201,10 +201,8 @@ find_appropriate_src(struct net *net, u16 zone,
> > &ct->tuplehash[IP_CT_DIR_REPLY].tuple);
> > result->dst = tuple->dst;
> >
> > - if (in_range(l3proto, l4proto, result, range)) {
> > - rcu_read_unlock();
> > + if (in_range(l3proto, l4proto, result, range))
> > return 1;
> > - }
> > }
> > }
> > return 0;
>
>
> This could explain the rcu_read_unlock() imbalance Stephen had (lockdep
> splat with net-next)
>
>
> How old is this bug ?
>
>
>
This fixes the lockdep splat I saw when staring KVM vm's with net-next and lockdep enabled
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
