On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 05:26:07PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: [...] > > BTW, this cache consistency check > > > > commit 200bc399651499f502ac0de45f4d4aa4c9d37ab6 > > Author: Phil Sutter <phil@xxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Mar 13 13:02:12 2020 +0100 > > > > nft: cache: Fix iptables-save segfault under stress > > > > is already restored in this series, right? > > Yes, IIRC this was the reason why I got a merge conflict upon rebase. > But the problem shouldn't exist with the new logic: We fetch cache just > once, so there is no cache update (and potential cache free) happening > while iterating through chain lists or anything. Still another process might be competing to update the ruleset, right?
