Florian Westphal <f...@strlen.de> writes: > Eric W. Biederman <ebied...@xmission.com> wrote: >> Florian could you test and verify this patch fixes your issues? > > Yes, this seems to work. > > Pablo, I'm fine with this patch going into -nf/stable but I do not think > making the pointers per netns is a desireable option in the long term. > >> Unlike the other possibilities that have been discussed this also >> addresses the nf_queue path as well as the nf_queue_hook_drop path. > > The nf_queue path should have been fine, no? > > Or putting it differently: can we start processing skbs before a netns > is fully initialized?
The practical case that worries me is what happens when someone does "rmmod nfnetlink_queue" while the system is running. It appears to me that today we could free the per netns data during the rcu grace period and cause a similar issue in nfnl_queue_pernet. That looks like it could affect both the nf_queue path and the nf_queue_nf_hook_drop path. Eric
