Hi Patrick,

Patrick McHardy wrote:

> Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote:
>
>> The assertion is right, because we alter unconfirmed packets when 
>> setting
>> up nat info. And you're also right, write-locking is unnecessary: the
>> entry is not in the hash table yet, so nobody else can grab and 
>> modify the
>> conntrack entry. [And it is overlooked in the per bucket locking 
>> patch too.]
>
>
> I've ported your conntrack patches to 2.6, I will include this change
> before adding them to CVS.


Attached the patch to fix this.

regards,
Pablo