On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 06:48:07PM +0800, Xin Long wrote: >> when we use 'nft -f' to sumbit rules, it will build multiple rules into >> one netlink skb to send to kernel, kernel will process them one by one. >> meanwhile, it add the trans into commit_list to record every commit. >> if one of them's return value is -EAGAIN, status |= NFNL_BATCH_REPLAY >> will be marked. after all the process is done. it will roll back all the >> commits. >> >> now kernel use list_add_tail to add trans to commit, and use >> list_for_each_entry_safe to roll back. which means the order of adding >> and rollback is the same. that will cause some cases cannot work well, >> even trigger call trace, like: >> >> 1. add a set into table foo [return -EAGAIN]: >> commit_list = 'add set trans' >> 2. del foo: >> commit_list = 'add set trans' -> 'del set trans' -> 'del tab trans' >> then nf_tables_abort will be called to roll back: >> firstly process 'add set trans': >> case NFT_MSG_NEWSET: >> trans->ctx.table->use--; >> list_del_rcu(&nft_trans_set(trans)->list); >> >> it will del the set from the table foo, but it has removed when del >> table foo [step 2], then the kernel will panic. >> >> the right order of rollback should be: >> 'del tab trans' -> 'del set trans' -> 'add set trans'. >> which is opposite with commit_list order. >> >> so fix it by rolling back commits with reverse order in nf_tables_abort. > > > You're reporting a kernel panic. > > Could you please provide a sequence of commands to reproduce it with > the existing code? > > Thanks. the reproduce is a kind of long, do i need to repost this patch with the reproduce? -- 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
