From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75954C4724C for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 15:44:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A3162076D for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 15:44:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726441AbgD3Pop (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2020 11:44:45 -0400 Received: from correo.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:38870 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726415AbgD3Poo (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2020 11:44:44 -0400 Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (unknown [192.168.2.11]) by mail.us.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26E83F23A9 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:44:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1819EDA7B2 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:44:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix, from userid 99) id 0D59FBAAB4; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:44:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D3C2DA7B2; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:44:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 192.168.1.97 (192.168.1.97) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/antivirus1-rhel7.int); Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:44:41 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/antivirus1-rhel7.int) Received: from us.es (unknown [90.77.255.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: 1984lsi) by entrada.int (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E298842EFB83; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:44:40 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:44:40 +0200 X-SMTPAUTHUS: auth mail.us.es From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Phil Sutter , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [iptables PATCH v2 00/18] iptables: introduce cache evaluation phase Message-ID: <20200430154440.GA3999@salvia> References: <20200428121013.24507-1-phil@nwl.cc> <20200429213609.GA24368@salvia> <20200430135300.GK15009@orbyte.nwl.cc> <20200430150831.GA2267@salvia> <20200430152606.GM15009@orbyte.nwl.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200430152606.GM15009@orbyte.nwl.cc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 05:26:07PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: [...] > > BTW, this cache consistency check > > > > commit 200bc399651499f502ac0de45f4d4aa4c9d37ab6 > > Author: Phil Sutter > > 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?