Hi Pablo, Thank you for the update and reviewing the patch. We will wait for your patch to be applied to the LTS and then consume the latest 6.1 kernel. ------ Best regards, Kuntal On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 6:15 AM Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > Thanks for your patch. > > rbtree GC chunk is not correct though. In 6.1, GC runs via workqueue, > so the cached timestamp cannot be used in such case. > > Another possibility is to pull in the patch dependency to run GC > synchronously. > > I am preparing a batch of updates for -stable, let me pick up on your > patch. > > Thanks. > > On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 04:01:46PM -0700, Kuntal Nayak wrote: > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nft_set_rbtree.c b/net/netfilter/nft_set_rbtree.c > > index 5bf5572e9..c4c92192c 100644 > > --- a/net/netfilter/nft_set_rbtree.c > > +++ b/net/netfilter/nft_set_rbtree.c > [...] > > @@ -622,12 +624,14 @@ static void nft_rbtree_gc(struct work_struct *work) > > struct nft_set *set; > > unsigned int gc_seq; > > struct net *net; > > + u64 tstamp; > > > > priv = container_of(work, struct nft_rbtree, gc_work.work); > > set = nft_set_container_of(priv); > > net = read_pnet(&set->net); > > nft_net = nft_pernet(net); > > gc_seq = READ_ONCE(nft_net->gc_seq); > > + tstamp = nft_net_tstamp(net); > > > > if (nft_set_gc_is_pending(set)) > > goto done; > > @@ -659,7 +663,7 @@ static void nft_rbtree_gc(struct work_struct *work) > > rbe_end = rbe; > > continue; > > } > > - if (!nft_set_elem_expired(&rbe->ext)) > > + if (!__nft_set_elem_expired(&rbe->ext, tstamp)) > > continue; > > > > nft_set_elem_dead(&rbe->ext); > > -- > > 2.39.3 > >
