On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 3:39 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 3:27 PM Florian Westphal <fw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c b/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c > > > index 00f4bd21c59b419e96794127693c21ccb05e45b0..f1c31757e4969e8f975c7a1ebbc3b96148ec9724 100644 > > > --- a/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c > > > +++ b/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c > > > @@ -169,7 +169,9 @@ instance_destroy_rcu(struct rcu_head *head) > > > struct nfqnl_instance *inst = container_of(head, struct nfqnl_instance, > > > rcu); > > > > > > + rcu_read_lock(); > > > nfqnl_flush(inst, NULL, 0); > > > + rcu_read_unlock(); > > > > That works too. I sent a different patch for the same issue yesterday: > > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netfilter-devel/patch/20240514103133.2784-1-fw@xxxxxxxxx/ > > > > If you prefer Erics patch thats absolutely fine with me, I'll rebase in > > that case to keep the selftest around. > > I missed your patch, otherwise I would have done nothing ;) > > I saw the recent changes about nf_reinject() and tried to have a patch > that would be easily backported without conflicts. > > Do you think the splat is caused by recent changes, or is it simply > syzbot getting smarter ? (It took me a fair amount of time to find a Fixes: tag, this is why I am asking)
