Re: [PATCH] netfilter: nf_tables: fix rule batch with anonymous set and module autoload

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 11:37:56AM +0000, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> [ sorry accidentally dropped netfilter-devel ]
> 
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:27:08PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > If some modules are missing while processing a rule batch, the updates
> > are aborted to start scratch since the nfnl lock was released. If the
> > rule-set contains this configuration (in this order):
> > 
> >  #1 rule using anonymous set
> >  #2 rule requiring module autoload
> > 
> > The anonymous set will be released when aborting. This patch fixes this
> > by passing a context variable (autoload) that can be used to decide if
> > the anonymous set has to be released or not.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > I guess we can encapsulate that autoload into a context information structure
> > in the future in case any other information is needed in the rule destroy path
> > to make this look nicer.
> >
> > I started hacking on two patches to net-next, one to include table, chains and
> > set into the batch and follow up to add atomic updates for sets. @Patrick: I
> > think that should not interfer with your set enhancements.
> 
> Wouldn't be a big problem, they're pretty much contained to newset().
> 
> Regarding this patch - I'd really prefer to just fix batches to include sets
> instead of changing all these function signatures just to handle this very
> specific case.

If the patch that results from adding the set into the batch support
is ~100 LOC, we can pass that to -stable, but if it doesn't, we'll
have to pass this first or tell people that they need to load all
modules as a workaround.

> I'm wondering how this will work in case of anonymous sets though, right now
> we need two transactions so userspace can attach the new set to the lookup
> expression.

The set definition and the elements need to be included in the lookup
expression for anonymous sets, can you think of any better solution?
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux