On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 5:29 PM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > It would be better not to drop skb in conntrack unless we have good > alternative as Florian said[1]. So we can treat the result of testing > skb's header pointer as nf_conntrack_tcp_packet() does. > > [1] > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240307141025.GL4420@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_proto_dccp.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_proto_dccp.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_proto_dccp.c > index e2db1f4ec2df..ebc4f733bb2e 100644 > --- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_proto_dccp.c > +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_proto_dccp.c > @@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ int nf_conntrack_dccp_packet(struct nf_conn *ct, struct sk_buff *skb, > > dh = skb_header_pointer(skb, dataoff, sizeof(*dh), &_dh.dh); > if (!dh) > - return NF_DROP; > + return -NF_ACCEPT; > > if (dccp_error(dh, skb, dataoff, state)) > return -NF_ACCEPT; > @@ -533,7 +533,7 @@ int nf_conntrack_dccp_packet(struct nf_conn *ct, struct sk_buff *skb, > /* pull again, including possible 48 bit sequences and subtype header */ > dh = dccp_header_pointer(skb, dataoff, dh, &_dh); > if (!dh) > - return NF_DROP; > + return -NF_ACCEPT; > > type = dh->dccph_type; > if (!nf_ct_is_confirmed(ct) && !dccp_new(ct, skb, dh, state)) > -- > 2.37.3 > I saw the status in patchwork was changed, but I've not received the comments. So I spent some time learning how it works in the netfilter area. I just noticed that there are two trees (nf and nf-next), so should I target nf-next and resend this patch and another one[1]? [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/netfilter-devel/20240308092915.9751-2-kerneljasonxing@xxxxxxxxx/T/#m0ced362b380cff7e031d020e906ec2aa00669ce6 Thanks, Jason
